Full text of "Semitic influence in Hellenic mythology, with special reference to the recent mythological works of the Rt"

See other formats

PRINCETON, N. J. ^*

Shelf

Division i^ L^ ( Q 3

Section r^.^...\...
Number

By the same Author

THE GREAT DIONYSIAK MYTH. 8 illustra-
tions (1877-8). 2 vols. 12.9 each.

THE UNICORN: a Mythological Investigation.
6 illustrations (1881). 35.

THE LAW OP KOSMIC ORDER (1882). 3^.

ERIDANUS: River and Constellation. 5 illus-
trations (1883). hs.

THE MYTH OF KIRK£] (1883). bs.

THE 'HEAVENLY DISPLAY' OF ARATOS.

Map and 68 illustrations (1885). 10s 6ti

LONGMANS, GREEN & CO., 39, Paternoster Row,
London.

A TRILOGY OF THE LIFE-TO-COME, and

otber Poems (1887). 2s Qd.

TELLIS AND KLEOBEIA (1895). 2s 6t^.
DAVID NUTT, 270-271, Strand, London.

SEMITIC INFLUENCE IN HELLENIC
MYTHOLOGY

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE RECENT MYTHOLOGICAL

WORKS OF THE RT. HON. PROF. F. 31 AX MULLER AND

MR. ANDREW LANG

ROBERT BROWN, Jun., f.s.a., m.r.a.s.

The truth can be discovered by careful research. We must not despair of truth.

Lang.

WILLIAMS AND NORGATR,

14, HENEIETTA STREET, COVENT GAEDEN, LONDON

20, SOUTH FREDEEICK STEEET, EDINBUEGH ; am.

7, BEGAD STEEET, OXFOED.

1898.

LONDON :

O. NORMAN AND SON, PKINTF.RS, FLORAL STREET,

COVENT GARDEN.

DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY

SIR PETER LE PAGE RENOUF,

Late President of the Society of Biblical Archaeology.

PREFACE

The leaders in England of two schools of mythology,
based mainly in the one case on Aryan linguistics
and in the other on anthropology, have recently
published their revised, and probably final, con-
clusions. The time, therefore, seems opportune for
a statement of the principles of a third School,
which, for present purposes, I may style the Aryo-
Semitic. Its members, whilst paying every respect to
the s}'stem of Aryan philology, and fully recognizing
the vast results that have sprung from the scientific
application of Aryan linguistics, are nevertheless of
opinion that the Aryanists have been unable to
explain Hellenic mythology and Hellenic archaic
history as a whole, because they have almost wholly
ignored or denied the existence of that great mass
of Semitic influence, which the Aryo- Semitic School
hold is to be found throughout the length and
breadth of Hellas. This latter School, moreover,
is in entire sympathy with the researches of anthro-
pology in general, and of folklore in particular.
They welcome light from any quarter, but they

X HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

more especially direct attention to that important
influence, becoming clearer to us almost every year,
which the Valleys of the Euphrates and of the Nile,
and the populations of Syria and of Asia Minor have
exercised upon the Greek mind. Long-established
theories, whatever great names they may claim in
their support, must, perforce, give way to facts.
Everything is a question of evidence, but in each
case the best evidence attainable should be procured.
It will never do, with Mr. Herbert Spencer, to first
cut and dry your theory, and then to send out
gleaners to gather facts in its support.

At present in England there is a kind of lazy
feeling in the air ; and, in the department of literature,
this makes itself felt by the wish to be acquainted
with the latest results of research without trouble.
The State has decided that education is necessary;
and the want of it is now felt, except in the case
of persons of high social position, to be somewhat
disgraceful. Knowledge, people admit, is delightful;
but then its acquisition is so painful. This wish to
be up to date with very little effort, naturally drives
men to sit at the feet of smart Gamaliels, who, in
a few piquant pages, pui-port to demolish the con-
clusions at which sages of European fame may have
arrived after half a century of toil; and to replace
their exploded teachings by another gospel of most
superior brand. Let us not be too sure about such

PREFACE XI

alleged rapid gains. Great results generally arise
from great efforts; just as good workmanship is
almost universally costly. Many men are liiglily
educated in a way. But that is not enough; to
impart real benefit, they must also be possessed of
refined common sense. Do not let us over-estimate
the advantages conferred by mere education as
ordinarily understood. Its results mainly depend
upon the inherent character of the soil into which
it falls. Thus, education can never make fools wise ;
but it can undoubtedly bestow upon them a larger
area for the exercise of their folly.

I leave with confidence the following pages to the
careful consideration of the reader, whether he chance
to be critic, professional reviewer, scholar Classical
or Oriental, anthropologist, folklorist, or honest man
in the street who wishes to know something about
these matters. I only ask him, whoever he may be,
to weigh the questions well; and, without fear or
favour, to give a true verdict according to the
evidence.

In the spelling of names, I generally adopt the
original forms, because they are the most correct.
Severe logical uniformity in this matter is not at
present attainable. A correct practice is, however,
steadily gaining ground, notwithstanding divers
violent protests on the part of some of those who

Xll HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

think that Time can consecrate error and canonise
stupidity.

The illustration on the cover, representing Herakl^s
and the Stymphalian Birds, as shown on a Gem at
Florence, is taken from Smith's Smaller Classical
Dictionary^ by the kind permission of Mr. John
Murray.

BaETON-ON-HumBEK :

March, 1898.

CONTENTS

PART I.

PROFESSOR MAX MULLER'S LAST PRONOUNCEMENT
ON MYTHOLOGY.

PAGE
. 1

I. PROF. MULLER S ACHIEVEMENTS ....
II. GENERAL PLAN OF TRE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SCIENCE
OF MYTHOLOGY {1897) ....

III. STUDY OF SAVAGE TRIBES

IV. THE ORIGINAL ARYAN UNITY
V. VEDIC-SANSKRIT AND GREEK EQUATIONS

VI. INSTANCE OF A PHONETIC OBJECTION
VII. APPLICATION OP PHONETIC RULES TO PROPER
NAMES ......

VIII. PHONETIC LAWS, SO-CALLED
IX. UNEXPLAINED PHONETIC IRREGULARITIES .
X. SOLAR MYTHOLOGY .....

XI. LIGHT THROWN BY THE VEDA ON GREEK MYTHO-
LOGY ......

XII. NOVEL ETYMOLOGIES .....

XIII. 'the LESSON OF JUPITKR ^
XIV. WHERE I DISAGREE WITH PROF. MULLER

4
4

9
11
12

15
16
18
20

PART II.

MR. LANG'S LATEST ATTACK UPON PROFESSOR
MULLER.

I. MR. ANDREW LANG . . . . • •

II. MR. LANG AND PROF. MAX MULLER .

III. MR. Lang's peculiar view of philology . .

IV. ' NO GENTLEMAN EVER CONSCIOUSLY MISREPRE-
SENTS '.......

23
24

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

Y. THE ' GENTLEMAN ' NEVER UNFAIR

VJ. MR. LANG ON * COMPETING ETYMOLOGIES^ .

VII. ANOTHER ^COMPETING ETYMOLOGY ' FALLACY. .

VIII. REASONABLE EFFECT OF DIFFERENCES OF OPJNION

IX. DIFFERENCES OF OPINION APPARENT RATHER THAN

REAL .......

X. DIFFERENCES AMONGST ANTHROPOLOGISTS . .

XI. THE MYTH OF DEMETER-ERINNYS

XII. THE DfiMfiTfiR-ERINNYS MYTH NOT A DAWN-TALE

XIII. REAL CHARACTER OF THE d£MET£R-ERINNYS

MYTH .......

XTV. MANNHARDT ON THE DEMETER-ERINNYS MYTH

XV. A ' DISEASE OF LANGUAGE ' . . .

XVI. ALLEGED EGYPTIAN TOTEMISM

XVII. ANOTHER INSTANCE OF EXPLODED TOTEMISM

XVIII. APOLLON, MR. LANG, AND THE MOUSE

XIX. ROUT OF MR. LANG BY THE MOUSE .

XX. ARTEMIS, ARKAS, AND THE BEAR .

XXI. THE BRAURONIAN BEAR-CULT .

XXII. A KEY OP KNOWLEDGE FROM MR. LANG^S BUNCH

XXIII. APPLICATION OF THIS METHOD TO THE MYTH OF

THE BIRTH OF ATHSNA. . . . .

XXIV. THE SIN OF THE GOD ZU . . . .

XXV. WHAT HAS MR. LANG GAINED ? . . .

32
33
35
37

38
40
41
44

46
49
51
54
57
58
59
61
67
71

74
77

PART III.

THE ARYO-SEBIITIC SCHOOL OF HELLENIC
MYTHOLOGISTS

I. RETROSPECT ....... 81

II. CERTAIN DIFFICULTIES OF THE STUDENT IN

ENGLAND . . . . . . . 84

III. GENERAL STANDPOINT OF THE ARYO-SEMITIC

SCHOOL ....... 86

IV. SEMITIC INDICATIONS IN GREEK MYTHOLOGY , . 90

CONTENTS

V. ' THE QUESTION OF ALLIES ' . . . .

VI. AN INSTANCE OP THE RESULTS OF THE HISTORICAL
METHOD

VII. THE CONTESTS OP THE GODS AND HEROES

VIII. HERAKLl^S ....

IX. ATHENA V. POSElD(m

X. A DIGRESSION

XI. PROF. MULLER AND M. BERARD

XII. PROF. MULLER ON THE KABEIROI

XIII. KRONOS .....

XIV. POSEIDON ....

XV. THE NAME ' POSEID(m '
XVI. APHRODITE
XVII. ' PRESENTING THEBES '
XVIII. A SEMITIC MOON-MYTH
XIX. ATHAMAS = TAMMUZ
XX. KIRKE ....

XXI. THE HOMERIC NEKYIA
XXII. HEKATE ....

XXIII. ATHfiNE ILIA ......

XXIV. THE GREEK CONSTELLATION-MYTHS

XXV. PALAMfiDES

XXVI. THE ANCIENT GREEK CONSTELLATION-FIGURKS
XXVII. THE SIGNS OF THE ZODIAC
XXVIII. THE HOMERIC CONSTELLATIONS
XXIX. THE CONSTELLATION-FIGURES AS COIN-TYPES
XXX. HAREKHAL AND THE STYMPHALIAN BIRDS
XXXI. ROMAN DIVINITY-NAMES ....

XXXII. CONCLUSION

APPENDIX A. PROFESSOR AGUCHEKIKOS ON TOTEMISM

APPENDIX B. LIST OP PAPERS BY THE AUTHOR ON

ASTRONOMICAL MYTHOLOGY
INDEX .....

PAGE

ABBREVIATIONS

C. = 'Rt. Hon. Prof. Max Miiller, Contributions to the Science
of Mythology (1897).

M. M.==llr. Andrew Lang, Modern Mythology (1897).

W. A. I. = Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, Vols. I.-V.
(Publish ed by the Trustees of the British Museum).

K. = Kouyunjih Collection of Cuneiform Tablets (British
Museum).

Ak. = Akkadian.

Ar. = Arabic.

As. = Assyrian.

Bab. = Babylonian.

Et. = Etruscan.

Ph. =Phoenician.

Sk. = Sanskrit.

Sum. = Sumerian.

SEMITIC INFLUENCE IN HELLENIC
MYTHOLOGY

PART I

PROFESSOR MAX MULLERS LAST PRONOUNCEMENT
ON MYTHOLOGY

I. Prof. Mliller's Achievements

Ripe in years and rich in honours Prof. Max Miiller
has now completed his self-imposed and formidable
task of giving to the world his facts and theories
respecting the four sciences of Language, Religion,
Thought and Mythology. And if the old soldier of
seventy -three finds, to our universal regret, that his
eye grows somewhat dim and his natural force abates
(Yide C. p. xxvi), he has not to grieve, with the
beautiful Kallikrates (Yide Herod, ix. 72), that he
must pass to the great silence without having lifted
his arm against the enemy or done deed worthy of
him. For, though ever gentle in the tourney, and
specially objecting to that keen personal controversy
which so easily degenerates into unmannerly
bickerings. Prof. Miiller, however we may differ
with him in detail, has done many a doughty deed,
illumined many a dark spot, vastly widened the
bounds of our knowledge, placed his views before
the world in due completeness, and, if the translation
of the Big-Veda be an achievement reserved for the

6r^

2 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

twentieth century, sung his song to the last stanza.
And it is upon his great contributions to human
knowledge and to human thought, and not merely
upon an elegant and luminous style, — as Mr.
Andrew Lang (J/. M. p. 200) suggests, in a
compliment which, however well meant, closely
borders upon an insult, — that Prof. Miiller's
permanent fame will securely rest.

II. General Plan of the ' Contributions to the Science
of Mythology'

These two goodly volumes, containing 900 pages,
are divided into a Preface and six chapters, the
first of which is a Retrospect, whilst the others
severally treat of the Problems and Methods of the
Science of ^lythology, of the Analogical and
Psychological Schools of Comparative Mythology, of
Phonetics, and, lastly, of Yedic Mythology. In the
Preface the Professor shows that, as a matter of
fact, his method and general principles are not obsolete
and bygone, as has of late been sometimes asserted
in England. He is no solitary Athanasius, but has
numerous very powerful fellow-workers, disciples,
and allies, alike in Europe and in America. This,
of course, is well known to scholars, but is frequently
forgotten by those who draw their inspiration from
the latest article in some English magazine. Thus,
Mr. Andrew Lang remarks : —

' Mr. Max Miiller's ideas, in various modifications,
are doubtless still the most prevalent of any. The
anthropological method has hardly touched, T think,
the learned contributors to Roscher's excellent
rajthological Lexicon.'

i] MAX muller's pronouncement 3

On this I may observe that, wliilst the scientific
mind of Germany, as of course, welcomes all sober
research, anthropological or otherwise, it is dead
against the methods of the ' untutored anthropologist,'
and for reasons which will clearly appear in these
pages.

Alluding to a recent phase of literary opinion in
England, Prof. Muller says : —

' If, as happens sometimes, the same critic is on
the staff of many [)apers, and has to supply copy
every day, every week, or every month, the broken
rays of one brilliant star may produce the dazzling
impression of many independent lights, and there
has been ot" late such a galaxy of sparkling articles
on Comparative Mythology and Folklore, that even
those who are themselves opposed to this new
science, have at last expressed their disapproval
of the "journalistic mist " that has been raised, and
that threatens to obscure the real problems of the
Science of Mythology ' {C. p. vii).

He concludes his Preface with the followino; clear
and large-hearted expression of his standpoint : —

' Whoever recognizes in mythology the last traces
of [what we now call] a poetical conception of
the solemn drama of nature, is on our side, and
whatever the grammar and literature may be which
he chooses for his own special study, whether those
of Babylon or Egypt, of Lets or Fins, of Maoris
or Mincoupies or Mincopies, if he can draw from
them any contributions towards the elucidation of
our ancient Aryan myths, he will be welcomed as
a useful ally and as a worthy fellow-labourer '
{Ih. p. xxviii).

-1 ■i^

4 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

III. Study of Savage Tribes

Whilst thus welcoming all sound research,
whether linguistic, mythological or anthropological,
Prof. Miiller urges that the study of the beliefs
and customs of savages should be made with great
care and caution ; and that it is most desirable that
the investigator should, at all events to some extent,
master the language of those about whom he is
ofoinof to write. He observes : —

' I can quite understand the strong prejudice
which scholars feel against the purely dilettante
work of certain ethnologists who write about the
customs and myths of people whose language they
do not understand' {Ih. p. 24).

This eminently reasonable opinion has been
received with a grimace in certain quarters. Nor
is the cause far to seek ; for it is vastly easier to
compare the statements of a dozen books than to
learn a single foreign language.

Innumerable mistakes have been made respecting
the beliefs of savages, partly through the carelessness
of investigators, but largely through misapprehen-
sions arising from linguistic ignorance. The same
expressions, the same words, the same sounds,
constantly mean very different things to diiFerent
people.

IV. The Original Aryan Unity

As the now scattered branches of the Indo-
European race were once a united family possessed
of a single language (Proto-Aryan), Prof. Miiller
holds that, prior to their separation, they had ' not
only common words {ixvOol), but likewise common
myths {^vOoi: Ih, p. 21). The contrary proposition

i] MAX mullek's pronouncement 5

is almost unthinkable. The dwellers in Yorkshire,
Greece, Mangaia, or anywhere else, have always had
both. If anything further is required in support
of so obvious a truth, let us quote the high authority
of Mr. Lang, who, speaking of the ' Saranyu-Erinnys
myth,' observes : —

' Why the story occurred both in Greece and
India, I protest that I cannot pretend to explain,
except on the hypothesis that the ancestors of
Greek and Vedic peoples once dwelt together, had
a common stock of savage fables, and a common or
kindred language. After their dispersion, the
fables admitted discrepancies, as stories in oral
circulation occasionally do' (J/. M. p. 69).

Just so. Prof. Miiller next holds : —
' That what we call the gods of mythology were
chiefly the agents supposed to exist behind the great
phenomena of nature' (C p. 21).

I confess I find little or no difference amongst
investigators upon this point. Some, indeed, may
give more prominence to the Dawn-spirit, 'other
some ' to the Corn -spirit, so beloved by Mannhardt
and Mr. J. G. Frazer. But that does not touch
the principle. If we take away from the mind of
the men of archaic times 'the great phenomena
of nature,' and all agents supposed to be connected
with them, there is not much left for the Archaics to
make gods out of. They would almost have been
compelled to fall back on Mr. Herbert Spencer's
ancestor-worship. But it is agreed on all sides
that this theory practically involves a ' hysteron
proteron ' and cannot be accepted (Vide C. 3, 154-5 ;
M. 21. p. 126, note).

6 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

Prof. Miiller next holds : —

^ That the names of some of these gods and heroes,
common to some or to all the branches of the Aryan
i'amily of speech, and therefore much older than
the Yedic or Homeric periods, constitute the most
ancient and the most important material on which
students of [Aryan] mythology have to work '
{C. p. 21).

That there should be some such god- and hero-
names is practically as certain as that existing
Aryan dialects possess numerous common ordinary
words in variant forms. But, considering the lapse
of time, and the special influences which affect
proper names, it is a fair question to ask. Can we
now identify and successfully compare any or many
of these? This is, of course, a matter of evidence;
and the evidence in support of identification is
two-fold (1) That based upon linguistics — phonetic
laws ; and (2) That based upon similarity of concept
and treatment in detail of any two mythic
personages. It is not asserted that linguistics alone
are to be relied upon. Lastly, as there is
admittedly a Hyponoia (=Undercurrent of meaning)
in mythology, Prof. Miiller holds : —

' That the best solvent of the old riddles of
mythology is to be found in an etymological analysis
of the names of gods and goddesses, heroes and
heroines' {Ih. p. 21).

The meaning of the name is obviousl}^ of very
great importance in any attempt to explain a mythic
personage. But although the meanings of vast
numbers of ordinary words and of proper names are
known, yet some of both kinds continue to defy

l] MAX MULLERS PRONOUNCEMENT 7

all nttempts at solution. The etymology of others,
again, is doubtful.

V. Vedic- Sanscrit and Greek Equations

The following instances give some of Prof. Milller's
identifications of Vedic and Greek mythic personages,
based upon the principles before mentioned, and
maintained by him after considering carefully various
objections urged by different critic-scholars : —

Sk. Ahana = Gk. Athena; Sk. Bhura??yu = Gk.
Phoroneus; Sk.Dyaushpitar=Gk. Zeus-'7raT77/3(==:Lat.
Ju-piter) ; Sk. Sara/iyu = Gk. Erinys ; Sk.
Sarvara =: Gk. Kerberos ; Sk. Ushas = Gk. Eos ; Sk.
Yaruna = Gk. Ouranos ; Sk. Yivasvan = Gk. lasion
(z'.c, TtYdo-Ycov).

To such comparisons two objections have been
made. The first is that of certain scholars ; nearly
all these equations, they say, violate some phonetic
law, and are therefore impossible. The second
objection is that urged by Mr. Lang as protagonist
and on behalf of a certain class of anthropological
mythologists. They say, in effect, A¥e know
nothing, and care very little, about linguistics.
But we observe that the philological experts often
differ in opinion. As, in the abstract, and, for aught
we know, the opinion of Prof. A. is just as good
as that of Dr. B., it will be wise to accept neither
view ; and, further, to conclude that both opinions
are alike worthless. This second objection I shall
deal with subsequently (Vide inf, p. 35).

VI. Instance of a Phonetic Objection

Another well-known equation, Sk. Sarameya-s =
Gk. Hermeias, was first made by Kuhn. ' This

8 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

discovery,' says Prof. Miiller, ' marked a new starting
point in our studies, and it was so brilliant and
so convincino; that for a time it took even classical
scholars by storm. Afterwards followed a reaction.
Every kind of phonetic difficulty was raised, but
every objection was met, and after Benfey's exhaustive
paper on Hermes, Minos, and Tartaros, the phonetic
objectors were finally silenced ' ( C. p. 676). Not
' finally.' The persecution of this much-tried
equation soon recommenced. Mr. L. R. Farnell,
on the strength of ^ information received ' from his
'friend Professor Macdonell,' thus confidently
expresses himself: —

' The theory that Sarameya-s is to be identified
with 'EpyLteta? founders on the first vowel : the Greek
equivalent should be 'Upefxet-o^' {Cults of the Greek
States^ i. 3, note).

Is this so? Kick, in his list of the words of the
Aryan ' Grundsprache ' ( Worterhuch,, 1. 227), gives
the root sar^ meaning primarily ' to go,' and equates
Sk. sar-ma, Gk. 'op-fiy ('impetus'). From the root
sar spring Sk. sar-ani (' a path '), Sar-a?zyu
(' Morning- wind '), Sarama, 'and her ofFsprmg
Sarameya' (C i. 370. Note Prof. Miiller's argument
in loc). And, as Prof. Midler notes from Pick
{Griech, Personennamen^ p. 467), 'the elision of the
middle vowel is justified by such an example as
Harpyiae-Arepyiae. The connexion between Hermes,
the Gk. 'opfidw^ and Sk. words compounded with the
root sar^ is also supported by Sclierer in ' Roscher's
excellent Lexicon' (Vide sup. p. 2). Have, then,
Kuhn, Benfey, Pick, Scherer, Roscher, and
Prof. Miiller all ' foundered ' ' on the first vowel ' ?
I beg leave to doubt. And, again, if we were

i] MAX muller's pronouncement 9

compelled to accept such a Gk. form as LIcre-meios
(or -meias. Cf. the form Hermeas^ II. v. 390),
why should it not be abraded into //(?r-meias,
just as //cVa-kles reappears as ZT^r-cules? Let it
not be supposed that I am inclined to undervalue
the opinion of Prof. Macdonell. I learn from
Mr. Lang (J/. M. p. 201) that the Professor is ' the
representative of the historic house of Lochgarry ' ;
and I should as soon think of speaking disrespectfully
of the equator. But when a point of law is decided by,
say nine to three of the Judges, reasonable people don't,
as a rule, continue to doubt about it. They regard
the question as settled. According to Prof. Macdonell,
only one of these philological equations ' between
names of Greek and Vedic gods,' ' can be said to be
beyond the range of doubt.' Well, well; people may
doubt about almost anything. ' What is history but
a fable agreed upon? ' It has recently been
strenuously and learnedly argued that the
Gunpowder Plot was ' a put-up job ' by the Earl
of Salisbury. Prof. Miiller, as of course, admits
an absence of mathematical certainty in linguistic
research. But, far from repining, let us be thankful
for small mercies from Prof. Macdonell. One of
these equations, it seems, is above suspicion. All
hail, Calpurnia ! This fact may imply more than the
Professor reckons on.

VII. Application of Phonetic Rules to Proper Names

But here a further question arises, i.e.^ Do general
phonetic rules ' apply with equal force to proper
names, more particularly to the names of mythological
gods and heroes?' {C. p. 297). Curtius said yes;
Benfey, Prof. Victor Henry, Prof. Miiller and others

lO HELLENIC .AIYTHOLOGY [l

say no. Prof. Miiller, with a courageous love of
truth, ingenuously confesses : — ' I formerly agreed
with Curtius ' {Ih. p. 387); Mn former 3'ears I was
myself one of the straitest sect of phonetic pharisees.
But facts are facts, and one must live and learn'
{lb. p. 425). 'As long as our facts cannot be
denied, our deductions will have to be accepted '
{lb, p. 298).

And what are these facts? Why, that, from a
multitude of causes, proper names, especially those
• which have lost their etymological clearness '
{lb. p. 363), are exposed to alteration and corruption,
and have consequently been altered and corrupted in
a far greater degree than mere ordinary words.
' Xo phonetic rules would suffice to help us to
discover the original form and meaning of such names
as London, York, or Birmhigham' {lb. p. 363).
Christian names 'have been tortured in different
languages to such a degree that no phonetic rules
would give us a key to their secret history '
{lb. p. 365). To take an instance, — one which I am
sure will please Mr. Gomme,— of the change in a
local name: —

'It was very natural to discover in Wormingford,
the ford of the Wormings, z'.c, the sons of Worm,
and we all remember how the believers in universal
totemism discovered in these sons of Worm {Archceo-
loijkal Review^ iii. 357) the descendants or the
worshippers of the worm or serpent, and therefore
the abstainers from worms and serpents as part of
their daily food. Phonetically there was nothing
to be said against this etymology. But the circum-
stances were against it' {C. 363). Withcrmondcford,
the Widemondeford of Domesday l>ook, had been

i] MAX muller's pronouncement II

gradually changed (corrupted) into Wormingford.
' No one Avould build any phonetic rules on the
successive chano^es which Witherniondeford under-
went before it became Wormingford, and yet no one
would protest against their identification, though in
defiance of all phonetic rules Avdiich govern the
transition of old into modern EngUsh ' {lb. p. 3G4).
Exeunt Worm and his totem tribe.

VIII. Phonetic laws, so-called

What is Grimm's Law. ' Only a rule of observ-
ation ' (lb. p. 304). All so-called phonetic laws,
like so-called ' laws of nature/ are, in truth, but a set
of observations, liable at any moment to be controlled,
reformed, or regulated by some fresh observation.
To think otherwise is merely to make capital of our
nescience. Yet these considerations in no way
countenance linguistic laxity : —

'Phonetic laws, or, to use a more modest name,
phonetic rules or observations, if once established,
must, no doubt, be implicity obeyed; only we should
always try to remember how large or how small the
evidence is on which each single phonetic rule has
been made to rest. We should also be careful not
to reject at once any etymology if it ofi^ends against
(me or other of our many phonetic rules, particularly
if it is otherwise quite satisfactory on material as
well as on formal grounds ' {lb. p. 301).

But some ' phonetic pharisees ' make us justly
complain ' that historical, mythological, etymological,
and philosophical questions are ordered to stand
aside or ruled out of court whenever they conflict
or seem to conflict with phonetic observations. The

12 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

idea that the phouetic rules of to-day could possibly
have to yield to the phonetic rules of to-morrow, or
to other arguments, is never entertained '(/^. p. 300).
These considerations, and much more to the same
effect, with many cogent instances, are excellently
and most powerfully urged by Prof. Muller.

IX. Unexplained phonetic irregularities

To take two remarkable Greek instances of
phonetic irregularity at present inexplicable : —

' The Greek ^eo?, god, has been divorced from the
Sk. deva, bright and god, and deus in Latin,
simply on the ground of phonetic incompatibility.
But with all due respect for phonetic laws, my
respect for the logic of facts is too strong' to admit
belief in the propriety of this divorce. ' Why B
should have become 6 I honestly confess that I cannot
explain. . . . The Greek ^eo?, if not derived from
the root div, has found no other root as yet from
which it could have been derived, so as to account
for its meaning, as well as its form' (lb. p. 391).

Again : —

' Phonetic consciences might rebel against the
change in the name of Demeter of g into d, but so flir
as the ancient Greeks are concerned there can be no
doubt that they had accepted Demeter as Gc-meter
or Mother Earth. It is certainly strange that Ge,
so common in Greek, should in the name of the
goddess have been changed to De. . . . Strict
phoneticians would say that it was impossible. Still
as the irregularity occurs in a proper name it has
to be accepted, the material evidence being too strong

i] MAX muller's pronouncement 13

in favour of Demeter being an earth -goddess '

(lb. p. 535).

I have always regarded the truth of the matter to
be as follows: — When the names of two mythic
concepts^ palpahly identical in general character^
appear.^ although similar.^ to violate a phonetic rule,
such apparent violation., after making due alloivance
for dialectic differences and changes in pronunciation
brought about by time., shoidd he ascribed to the
operation of some other phonetic ride of which as yet
ice are ignorant. The same principle of course
applies to ordinary words. To know all is to under-
stand all. Imperfect knowledge, even if great, has
its special dangers.

X. Solar Mythology

For a few years past some of the camp-followers
of the anthropological school have rejoiced to gird
and jeer at certain (non-existent) mythologists who
were supposed to endeavour ' to turn everything
into the sun.' This cackle is rapidly dying away.
The sun still holds the field as the protagonist in
mythology; and nearly all students now admit the
immense mass of solar myth, not specially Aryan,
but found universally dominant alike amongst Lets
and Fins, by the Nile and the Euphrates, in the New
World as in the Old, in fact, solarism everywhere.
If there be still anyone who doubts this, let him
take a good course of Hibbert Lectures; let him
read and mark Sir P. Renouf, Religion of Ancient
Egypt (1880), Prof. Sayce, Beligion of the Ancient
Babylonians (1887), and Prof. Rhys, Religion as
illustrated by Celtic Heathendom (1888). Let him

1 4 IIELLEXIC MYTHOLOGY [l

then study the religions of Mexico and Peru. But,
above all, let him listen to the voice of Mi*. Lang :

' Nobody has ever denied [Umps!] that gods who
are the sun or live in the sun are familiar, and are the
centres of myths among most races' (J/. J/, p. 133).

' It is a popular delusion that the anthropological
mythologists deny the existence of solar myths, or of
nature-myths in general' {Ih. p. 63).

You see, gentle reader, that harmony is now
practically restored. Of course one occasionally
meets with an eccentric view respecting this or that
solar personage. Thus : —

'Mr. Frazer, Mamihardt's disciple, is very severe
on solar theories of Osiris [Mercy on us ! What will
be heresy next?], and connects that god with the
corn-spirit. But Mannhardt did not go so far,
Mannhardt thought that the myth of Osiris was
solar' (//>. p. xxii).

Very sensible of him. The 'corn-spirit' is evidently
mounting to Mr. Frazer's brain. If, following the
example of Mr. Swiveller, I may adapt the words of
a popular poet, —

0 Mr. Frazer, Mr. Frazer, what a man you are !

1 never thought when yoa set out that you woukl " go so far." '

Again : —

' Mannhardt takes the [f^imous and now familiar]
old Egyptian tale of" The Two Brothers'" {lb. p. 59),
and declares, ' The Marchen is an old obscure solar
myth' (lb. p. 61).

But :—

'Mr. Frazer, M:innhardt's disciple [and 'prophet,'

l] MAX MiJLLERS PRONOUNCEMENT I 5

Ih, p. 43], protests a grand cris af^ainst these
identifications when made by others than Mannhardt '
(B. p. 61).

Not qnite consistent of Mr. Frazer. And here it
is necessary for Mr. Lang to warn us that : —

' A tendency to seek for exclusivel}^ vegetable
origins of gods is to be observed in some of the most
recent speculations' {Ih. p. xxiii).

This may be called the Covent-garden-market
theory of mythology, and is evidently dangerously
seductive. Well may Mr. Lang style The Golden
Bouijli^ 'that entrancing book' {lb. p. 42).

XI. Light thrown by the Veda on Greek Mythology-
Many admirable instances are given by Prof
Midler of how Vedlc words, names, expressions,
modes of thought, and legends light up the obscure
places of Greek mythology. To take an instance.
We read in Homer : —

' Fair-tressed Demeter yielded to her love, and lay
with lasion in the thrice - ploughed fallow field '
{Od. V. 125-7. Ap. Butcher and Lang).

Tliis is a dark saying. We know indeed that
Demeter is the Earth, orderly and cultivated ; and
that her fair tresses = her golden grain. But we
must go to the Veda to see that lasion (Vide
sup. p. 7)=Vivasvan, i.e.^ the Sun. Then we
understand Demeter's love affair, no modern novel-
story of unbridled passion, but the influence of the
Sun upon the Earth, making her fruitful; whilst
Triptolemos, Demeter's henchman, a hero of civiliz-
ation and fabled inventor of the plough, is simply
the Thrice-ploughed-field (rptTroXo?) personified.

l6 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

Observe how perfectly the material features of the
myth harmonize with the true linguistic interpre-
tation of the names of the personages concerned ;
and how clear a light each side casts upon the other.
We look in vain e.g.^ to totemism for any such
illumination of human thought. We only find the
melancholy admission that totemism is itself inex-
plicable. Says Mr. Lang : —

' The origin of totemism is unknown to me, as to
McLennen and Robertson Smith' (il/. M. p. 75).

It is unnecessary here to add further instances of
Prof. Mllller's use of the Veda in illustration of
Greek mythology. The Demeter-Iasion myth is at
once a perfect example of his system and of its
success.

XII. Novel Etymologies
Novel etymologies will of course crop up from
time to time. Whether this circumstance is a reason
for discarding linguistics, I shall consider later.
To take one or two. Mannhardt, ' for the man was
mortal,' quotes Mr. Lang, gave an extraordinary
'guess ' atDemeter. Heithought it = fern Srj + fi'nTrjp =
' Corn-mother' (Vide M. M. p. o4). Has he on this
point one ' disciple' in the world? Prof. Bechtel has
recently amused us with some wondrous etymological
conjectures. Thus Dionysos, he thinks is derived
from Dios and snutya which latter word we find
might mean ' fed on mother milk ' {C. p. 373). He
takes Dionysos ' as originally a form of Zeus ' ; but,
as Prof. Mliller observes, the identity [of Dionysos]
with his father ... is a strong demand on our
faith, or rather on our credulity ' {Ih.). Moreover, as
Prof. Mliller shows, Prof. Bechtel, in this instance,

l] MAX MULLr]R's PRONOUNCEMENT 17

flings 'the phonetic rules' overboard. He next
attacks Aphrodite, poor creature, and we learn with
astonishment ' that the first name given to this
goddess of love was connected with fordus, pregnant,
and because she encouraged love and marriage [Did
she encourage marriage?] she is supposed [by Prof.
Bechtel] to have been celebrated as the Pregnant
Woman' [lb. p. 386). Indeed. Distinguo. Love is
one thing, marriage another, and pregnancy a third.
They are by no means necessarily connected with
each other. ' Fortunately,' continues Prof. Miiller,
' the very author of this etymology is afraid of the
consequences which it would involve.' Well he
may be. Aphrodite is certainly connected with
marriage, but merely as a Love-goddess. Let us
pass from such phantasies to a really scientific
conjecture. We are well aware what a crux the
name Apollon has been. Semitic derivations have
been suggested, but they are impossible because
Apollon is a thoroughly Aryan god. ' The ancients
derived 'KiroXkcov from 'airoXk-viJbi in the sense of
destroyer. . . Phonetically there is nothing to be
said against it. . But we cannot decide on an
etymology by means of phonetic laws only. The
meaning also has a right to be considered. Now we
have no right to say that from the beginning
Apollon was a destructive god' ( C. p. 689), an
Apollyon. And then Prof. Miiller, with very great
learning and ability, proceeds to show that Apollon
would correspond with such a Sk. form as *Apa-var-
yan or *Apa-val-yan, and that such a form would
mean ' the Opener,' z'.e., of the heavenly gates, eastern
and western, with which the sun and also Apollon
are so much connected. ' Phonetically there is no

1 8 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

possible objection ' {Ih. p. 694) to this derivation,
which also exactly corresponds with the original cen-
tral thought of the concept of Apollon, as a Sun-god.
But admirable as this suggestion is, Prof. MllUer by
no means lays it down as a dogma. He is, however,
fully entitled to the opinion that it is by far the best
explanation yet offered; and that therefore, at all
events for the present and until a better explanation
is forthcoming, it justly holds the field. He well
adds, ' In matters like these . . we ought not to
clamour for mathematical certainty ' (^Ih, p. 695).

XIII. 'The Lesson of Jupiter'

According to the very severe Prof. Macdonell
{Vedic MythoJocjy, p. 8), the equation, ' Dyaus =
Zeu9 is . . beyond the range of doubt' (Vide
M. M. p. 201 ; sup. p. 9). Here, then, we stand
on terra-jirma. But what does this admission
involve ? On this question Prof. Milller remarks : —

' Those who are fond of scoffing at the labours of
such men as Kuhn, Breal, Darmesteter and others,
fall down before Zeus = Jupiter = Dyaus. They
believe in the father of the devas, but not in his
sons and daughters' ({7. p. 529).

' That the Aryan mythologies spring from a
common source, the one equation of Dyaush-pitar,
Zeix; Trartjp^ and Ju-piter has placed once for all
beyond the reach of all reasonable doubt' (//;.
p. 451).

' Even the most stubborn opponents of all attempts
at tracing Greek and Indian gods back to a common
source seem to have yielded an unwilling assent to
the relationship between the Greek Zev^ Tranjp, the

l] MAX MULLEr's PRON()UNCEiMi:NT I9

Yedic Dyaush-pitar, the Latin Jupiter, and the
Teutonic Tyr. But they do not seem to have
perceived that in making this concession they have
in reality conceded everything, or at all events the
fundamental principle of scientific mythology. If it
is once admitted that the Supreme God of the
ancient [Aryan] world was known under one and
the same name before the ancestors of Hindus,
Greeks, Romans, and Germans became permanently
separated, and thafc the name of that Deity has
survived in the most ancient literary relics of every
one of these nations, it would surely seem to follow
that this could not have been the only name which
thus survived. If the word for ten is the same in
the princi])al Aryan languages, should we not be
surprised to find that all the other numerals were
different?' (//>. p. 498).

To this pellucid presentation of the argument it
is surely needless to make any addition. Nothing
much short of a miracle could prevent the existence
of other 'equations.' But the foregoing considerations
point also to another important truth. S. Paul, ever
a ' sound divine,' makes the further equation —
Zeus = God (Acts, xvii. 28). The Zeus of the noble
poems of Aratos and Kleanthes is God Himself, and
no meaner Being. And even if philological
comparative mythology had taught us nothing else,
we should still most justly revere her for this, that
she has demonstrated in a manner ' that cannot be
spoken against,' that our common ancestors,
however ignorant and erring they may have been,
yet worshipped, after their fashion, no less a Being
than the almighty and everlasting God.

2 ^

20 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [l

Such, then, is Prof. Mliller's final standpoint,
mythological and linguistic. Throughout his book
he supports his position with all that wealth of
illustration and fulness of knowledge which are so
peculiarly his own. Into further philological detail
it is needless for me to enter, especially since Mr. Lang
cares nought for such matters ; and I quite agree
with the Professor's general linguistic method in its
application to iVryan words and names. Mr. Lang,
as I understand him, regards the study of linguistics
in connexion with mythology as absolutely
worthless. To him Prof. MiiUer's philology is
neither better nor worse than that of Prof. Bechtel,
or of Mr. Casaubon. The whole thing is vanity.

XIV. Where I disagree with Prof. Mliller
My objection to Prof. Mliller's position is, briefly,
that he almost absolutely ignores the vast force and
extent of Semitic influence in Hellas, /.<?., Continental
Greece and her colonies ; and passes over, with the
slightest and most inadequate notice, the writers who
have demonstrated this important fact. Because the
Greeks were an Aryan nation, because Zeus, A'idoneus,
Hera, Dcmetcr, Apollon, Athena, Ares^ Hephaistos,
Hermes, Hestia, Pan (= Udcov^ ' the Herdsman.'
Roscher.), etc., were Aryan divinities, whose names,
concepts, and histories are rightly to be interpreted
on Aryan lines ; therefore, he practically assumes,
the whole Pantheon is Aryan. I do not accept this
conclusion. 1 say that the evidence, the logic of
facts historical and linguistic, is against this part of
his theory. The Aryan principle, the philology, the
history which so well explains Zeus and his real
(not merely artificial) family, fails when applied to

l] MAX MULLER's pronouncement 21

Kronos, Poseidon, Dionysos, Aphrodite, and many
other personages of Hellenic mythology. This view
of the matter, I shall endeavour to support in the
Third Part of the present work. Thus, whilst the
reader will perceive that I am no mere bhnd devotee
of Prof. Mliller, the latter, should he ever read these
pages, will do me the justice to believe that I under-
stand and appreciate his system ; and will accept my
assurance that I yield to none in admiration for his
profound learning and splendid achievements. Fifty
years of strenuous and sagacious effort have placed
upon his brow a crown which the whirligig of time
will be powerless to remove, let Carp and Pike try
their best, or their worst.

PART II

MB. LANG'S LATEST ATTACK UPON
PBOFESSOB. MULLEB

I. Mr. Andrew Lang

At the present time there are few British htera-
teurs more widely known than Mr. Andrew Lang.
The field of his activity is so large and his energy
is so untiring, that he is almost always in evidence.
He appeals to all sorts and conditions of men.
Have we a taste for the Classics? He can translate
Homer, and descant upon the Epic with equal
facility. Have we a leaning towards literature
generally, he can hold forth on books and bookmen,
and write to Dead Authors. Do we like verse? He
can produce it to any extent and of excellent
quality. Have we a weakness for a novel? He
supplies one with the utmost ease. He is equally at
home with Dreams, or the Cock Lane Ghost, or the
' Awful Apparition that appeared to Lord Lyttleton.'
Do we want a good heavy book (and some people
do)? He is ready for us with over 700 pages on
myths, ritual, and religion. He is the founder, or,
at all events, the most well known figure, of a
pecuhar school of anthropological mythology.
Classical performer (he objects to the term
'scholar'), translator, editor, novelist, poet, ghost-
story collector, anthropologist, and I know not what
besides, he is indeed a many-sided man. But when
we add to all this the fact that he is a professional
critic and reviewer, that his journalistic activity is

24 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

very great, that he is an habitual contributor to many
prominent magazines, a friend of any number of
literary men, and withal a past-master in the art
of flouts, jibes and jeers ; it will be seen that
Herakles himself, had he tackled such an opponent
with either club or pen, might probably have
deemed that he had all his work cut out for him.
And I am here the more reminded of the Son of
Alkmene, on account of the journalistic position
of Mr. Lang, who can smite you with the spear
of totemistic anthropology in the columns of the
Daily News, scalp and tomahawk you generally
in the Saturday lieview^ and transfix you with the
fine arrows of his sarcasm monthly in Longman^ s
Mayazine. He is thus a species of literary Geryon,
a Tricorpor^ a kind of (if, for the moment, he will
pardon the equation) Sarvara-Kerberos, ' three
gentlemen at once.'

II. Mr. Lang and Prof. Max Miiller

Naaman had much to be thankful for, and Ahab
was doubtless a fairly rich man; but yet we all
want somethinof. And so it chanced that Mr. Lano\
despite the position which his brilliant abilities
and tireless industry had won for him, had a secret
cause of dissatisfaction and discontent. It fell out
thus. He had often ' reviewed ' (a pleasant
expression frcquentl}' signifying ' to hold up to
scorn and contempt') Trof. Miiller; and, to his own
satisfaction and to that of certain of his friends,
had shown the worthlessness of the Professor's
linguistic and mythological oj)inions. He had even
expended no small store of jibes and jeers on the
Profesbor and ' the inevitable I)awn,' which will

Il] MR. LANCt's latest ATTACK 25

persist (thank God) in reappearing every morning.
But although he had done all this and more; and
had, in addition, excogitated a totem-bear and a
totem-mouse, wound them up and set them
a-working, — machinery in motion, — in regions
Hellenic; yet still, strange and sad to say, the
tranquil sage continued to labour on quietly, and did
not even so much as mention Mr. Lang in any of
his books (Vide C. p. 184). Such a situation was
intolerable ; but, although the days of the duello
have unfortunately gone by, there was still a way
out of it. I gather that a kind of deputation waited
upon Prof. Mliller to point out to him his incivility
in the matter ; and to urge him to amend his
manners by at once making an attack in writing
on Mr. Lano^. The Professor himself states : —

' I have been told, both in public and in private,
that it was hardly civil to leave the criticisms of such
men as Mr. Herbert Spencer and Mr. Andrew Lang
unnoticed and unanswered' ((7. p. 3).

The courteous veteran pleads in extenuation, that
he thought ' personal controversy ' did more harm than
good ; that many of the opinions now again advanced
he had replied to long ago ; and that as for
' their latest or loudest advocates,' he ' felt
considerable difficulty how to deal with some of
their criticisms or rather witticisms, without seeming
either harsh or discourteous.' Li the true spirit of the
gentleman, he adds : —

' I have always admired Mr. Herbert Spencer as
a hard worker and as a hard thinker, I admire
Mr. Andrew Lang as a charming poet and brilliant
writer.'

26 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

It is almost touching to see the old man thus
dragged into the fray; however, he intended to write
the Contributions, as a summary of his case and
position, and in this work he has obligingly made
some references to Mr. Lang's theories and opinions.

This, though a point gained, did not altogether
satisfy Mr. Lang, who evidently wanted a line by
line sort of Mill-upon-Hamilton examination of his
works by Prof. Miiller. However, his ' adversary '
(M. M. p. 200. 'For adversary we must consider
Mr. Max Miiller.' It quite reminds us of the evil
god ' Chaitan — obviously Shaitan,' Ih. p. 132) had
at length written another book ; and, what was
wanted, put Mr. Lang's name in it. So the
industrious man promptly sat down and reeled off
Modern Aliitliologij, in wdiich in the space of less
than 200 pages (for a portion of the work is
' constructive,' and does not refer to Prof. Miiller)
he ptn^ports again to pulverize the latter, and to
show up all his weakness, especially his ' disease
of lano^uatre.'

III. Mr. Lang's View of Philology

As Mrs. Squeers was no grammarian, so Mr. Lang,
doubtless with equal thankfulness, is no philo-
logist : —

' Etymologies, of course, I leave to be discussed
by scholars' (M. p. 137).

He may well let them alone, for he asserts,
evidently with (for the moment) honest con-
viction : —

' There is no name named among men which a
philologist cannot easily prove to be a synonym

ii] MR. Lang's latest attack 27

or metaphorical tei-m for wind or weather, dawn
or sun (/Z>. p. 135).

But ahhough regardless of philology, he is death
on logic. Caesarem ai^pellasti; ad Caesarem ibis.
Mr. Lang must (1 may presume) have carefully
read Prof. Midler's Contributions. He will therefore
know that the Professor is unable to explain such
familiar names as Olympos, Aphrodite, and Artemis.
He does know this, for he says : —

' As to the meaning and derivation of Artemis, our
Author [/.e., Prof. Miiller] knows nothing '
{lb. p. 147).

But ' our Author ' is a very great philologist.

Argal : the proposition, There is no name named
among men ichlch a philoloijist cannot easihj prove
to be a synonym or metapjhorlcal term for ivind or
weather^ dawn or sun, is false.

' What trick, what device, what starting hole, canst
thou now find out, to hide thee ? '

Perhaps ' our Author ' may reply that he didnt
mean what he said. This may be so, but such
an admission at once makes his whole work worthless.
But that we may be well satisfied he did mean
Avhat he said, hear him again : —

' We only oppose the philological attempt to
account for cdl the features in a god's myth [Italics
mine.] as manifestations of the elemental qualities
denoted by a name ichich may mean at 'pleasure
[Italics mine.] dawn, storm, clear air, thunder, wind.
twilight, water, or what you will ' {lb. p. 133,
Italics mine).

Thus, to Mr. i^ang, philology, with respect to

28 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

the names of gods, is simply 'a gallimaufrey of
gambols,' a kind of ' Twelfth Night or What you
Will.' But is this so? Take the familiar name of
Herakles. What ' pleasure ' Prof. Miiller would
feel if he could explain it. According to Mr. Lang,
the Professor could make it mean ^ dawn, etc.,' just
as he liked. As a matter of fact Prof. Miiller can't
explain the hero's name (Vide C. pp. 612, 632).
Therefore this representation of the matter by
Mr. Lang is as incorrect as his previous proposition
above noticed.

Mr. Lang's (real or assumed) ignorance of
philology saves him from the trouble of noticing
about five-sixths of Prof. Miiller's work, which,
nevertheless, he yet ventures to condemn as
practically worthless and misleading. From what
he says, I gather that if anyone asked him such a
question as, ' But you will surely admit that
Dyaus=Zeus?' he would reply, ' W^ell, really,
I can't pretend to say. I leave such matters to
" scholars " and other triflers.'

The unreasonableness of this attitude may be seen
by a parallel case. Suppose you are talking about
history with someone, and, apropos of what was being-
said, you remark, ' I presume you don't doubt that
Richard L was King of England ? ' What would be
thought of the man who replied, 'Well, really I don't
concern myself with such matters. It may be as you
suggest ; but my name is not Gardiner, and certainly
it is not — Green.'

Thus might we leave history to historians, la^^^ to
lawyers, divinity to divines, and so on, perhaps con-
tenting ourselves with some such humble indulgence
as^ e.(j.^ a mouse- totem.

ii] MR. Lang's latest attack 29

IV. *No gentleman ever consciously misrepresents'
' No gentleman or honest man,' says Mr. Lang,
' ever consciously misrepresents the ideas of an
opponent. . . It is always unconsciously that
adversaries [who are gentlemen] pervert, garble, and
misrepresent' (if. M. 92-3).

I agree ; but I regret to say that a ' gentleman ' is
often guilty of what may be called most reprehensible
negligence in his representations. Observe Mr. Lang's
statement above quoted: —

' We only oppose the philological attempt to account
for all the features in a god's myth as manifest ai ions
of the elemental qualities denoted hy ' the god's name.

Mr. Lang would be quite right to oppose such an
attempt, but nobody makes it.

He says : —

' That Zeus means " sky " cannot conceivably
explain scores of details in the very composite legend
of Zeus — say, the story of Zeus, Demeter, and the
Ram ' {Ih. p. xviii).

Referring to the admirable work of my friend
Mr. D. Gr. Hogarth, Philip and Alexander of Macedon^
he remarks : —

' As Mr. Hogarth points out, Alexander has
inherited in the remote East the myths of early
legendary heroes. We cannot explain these by the
analysis of the name of Alexander ' (Ibid.).

To this I reply, ' Who deniges of it, Mr. Lang ? '
And, to give my question ' a deeper and more awful
character of solemnity,' I repeat it, ' Mr. Lang, who
deniges of it ? ' When and where has Prof. Miiller,
or anyone else, said that the name 'Zeus' will explain

30 HELLEXIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

all the details related about Zeus ? What he does
say is that ' etymology is an immense help,' but that
'Comparative Mythology could exist and light up
more or less the darkest corners of mythology in
every part of the world ... if not a single name of
any god or hero had been preserved or could be
analysed etymologically ' ( C. p. 781). He does not
])retend to explain all that has been stated about
Zeus, either by means of philology or of any thing-
else. Thus he says : —

^ To explain all the love affairs of Zeus would be
difficult, if not impossihle'' ( C. p. 51(S. Itahcs
mine).

Now I ask Mr. Lang, How comes he to misrepre-
sent Professor Milller so gravely ? And the only
answer I can suggest is, that Mr. Lang is in such a
hurry to polish off his opponent, and to get on to
something more important, such as Dreams and
Ghosts^ that he cannot take the trouble to grasp
Professor Miiller's real position. Thus he here merely
sets up a man of straw which anyone could knock
down, and thereby (practically) tries to throw dust
into the eyes of the reader.

Thus, too, when some years ago I published a work
on a portion of the Odyssey^ hardly had it appeared,
when it was attacked with the utmost contempt and
derision in the Saturday Review by a ' critic ' whose
style and standpoint were exactly those of Mr. Lang.
I made no objection to the contempt and derision ;
but there was another feature in this attack to which
I did take exception. The Editor of the Academy
was, very properly, fond of a fair field and no favour ;
and he opened his columns to a discussion upon some

Il] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 3 1

of the points in question, in which controversy,
between some of my literary friends and myself on
the one hand and Mr. Lanii; on the other, accordino^
to general opinion the brilliant journalist came ofl'
but second best. I said : —

' It is refreshing to turn from the misrepresenta-
tions of the Saturday Bevieio critic who recently
attacked my Myth of Kirke, to the cautious language
of Mr. A. Lang in the Academy. My critic, after
saying, " Mr. Brown's arguments are something like
this" — just as a caricature is something like the
original — thus distorts my view : " Odysseus lived
in a cave, therefore Odysseus is the sun ; '' and then
makes a reference to Robinson Crusoe in order "to
set on some quantity of barren spectators to langh."
I can only rejoin that I never said anytliing of the
kind;

And, when noticing Mr. Lang's objection to tlie
mythological method of Sir Geo. Cox, I say that hca-e
again,

' The same unfortunate misrepresentation of the
matter occurs. Mr. Lang says, " That method rests
on the philological interpretation of the names," and
is " the exclusively philological method." But Sir
George says, '' Assuredly neither Odysseus, Herakles,
nor any other can be the sun, unless their names, their
genercd character.^ and their special features carry us
to this conclusion." '

Thus, alike in the cases of Prof. j\liiller and Sir
Geo. Cox, we find Mr. Lang most seriously mis-
representing his opponents. Well may he protest
that the ' gentleman ' only errs in this way by

32 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

accident. Well, then, let the ' gentleman ' be more
careful for the future.

V. The 'gentleman' never unfair

As the ' gentleman ' never wilfully misrepresents,
so, doubtless, he is never unfair. Yet at times it is
hard to realize this.

I have always regarded the Encyclopcedia Brit-
annica as being singularly unfortunate in its treat-
ment of mythology (Vide inf. p. 212). In the last
edition Mr. Lang, after giving his views on this
subject, refers to my Great Dionysiak Myth^ and
observes that it contains 'many useful references/
but that ' the reasonings need not be adopted.' In a
sense this is, of course, a truism ; but was it really
necessary, in such a very general treatment of the
subject, and in a work like the Encydopcedia
Britannica, to name a particular book merely because
it contained ' useful references ? ' Was it quite
needful to warn the babes and sucklings w^ho were
likely to read this Article, against being led away by
my (supposed) subtle errors ? Or rather did not
Mr. Lang, just after a controversy with me, gladly
take the opportunity to stereotype his dislike of my
opinions (which, at the same time, he made no
attempt to refute) by a wholly unnecessary reference
to them, treating them with the utmost contempt, in
a great work which most people would trustfully
accept as a standard authority ? Says Mr. Lang, iu
The New Review : —

' The writings of critics are often so ignorant, so
prejudiced, so spiteful, so careless, that perhaps no

ir] MR. Lang's latest attack 33

printed matter is more entirely valueless, and con-
temptible.'

This testimony is doubtless true.

VI. Mr. Lang" on * competing' etymologies'
But the reader may naturally ask, How can
Mr. Lang, if ignorant of philology, venture to sit in
judgment on and to condemn a work by the most
prominent philologist of the day, and five- sixths of
which is occupied with philological considerations ?
Mr. Lang's answer is, that, although he professes to
know nothing anent philological Comparative Myth-
ology, its votaries have given it away by their
differences of opinion ; and that we may therefore
unhesitatingly reject it. This position I will, there-
fore, next examine. Apart from philology however,
Mr. Lang informs us that he possesses a ' smattering
of unscholarly learning ' (M. M. p. 200) ; and is
doubtless, therefore, well equipped for the fray. Says
Mr. Lang :—

'Nothing irritates philological mythologists so
much, nothing has injured them so much in the
esteem of the public which " goes into these things a
little," as the statement that their competing etymo-
logies and discrepent interpretations of mythical
names are mutually destructive. I have been told
that this is " a mean argument " ' (J/. M, p. 50).

If this or any other argument be sound, it need not
fear being called ' mean.' But, first notice the gallery
to which Mr. Lang specially plays. It is composed
of Those - who - go - into - these - things-a-httle. These
persons, thus confessedly knowing but litde, are
naturally well competent to judge of much. In flict

34 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

they know just enough to be somewhat amused and
confused by Mr. Lang's pleasantries. Odj^sseus was
the sun, therefore Robinson Crusoe was the sun.
What an excellent jest, and how those readers of
the Saturday^ ' who go into these things a little,'
must have roared at it ! It is the people that go into
matters a little, who hold that the English nation are
the Ten Tribes, and a thousand other phantasies,
from which the man Avho can't go into them at all is
fortunately preserved.

Let us next examine that cardinal dogma of
Mr. Lano:'s on which his condemnation of
Prof. Miiller's position mainly rests. We learn
that :—

' Competing etymologies and discrepent interpreta-
tions are mutually destructive.' These differences
are, of course, differences of opinion ; therefore
differences of opinion (it seems) are mutually
destructive. Let us test this further, for Mr. Lang-
is nothing if not logical. I think of the number 9,
and ask A, B, and C to guess what number I have
thought of. A guesses o, B G, C 9. Are these
differences of opinion 'mutually destructive ?' Surely
C is right, and the other two wrong. So if Athena
is said to be the Moon (Porphyry), the Lightning
(Roscher), or the Dawn (Miiller), why are these
views ' mutually destructive.' Why may not one of
them be correct ? In the abstract Athena may=^
Anything, and Mr. Lang, of all men, has no right to
say that any of these views are wrong; since,
admittedly, he has no knowledge on the matter.
But, it ma}' be urged, in so doubtful a case, is it safe
to come to any positive conclusion ? Well, to
suspend judgment is in many mythological cases

Il] MR. LANG\s latest ATTACK 35

absolutely necessary ; and Mr. Lang once thought so
(Vide Myth^ BititaJ^ and Beluiion^ ii. 250). But now
he promptly condemns the whole lot as ' mutually
destructive.' And observe, in passing, there is a
general and absolute consensus amongst these sages
that Athena represents some natural phenomenon.
They are all disciples of the Natural Phenomena
Theory. So are Welcker, Preller, Schwartz, Lauer,
Furtwangler, and nearly everyone else who has
closely studied the Athena- myth.

VII. Another 'Competing' Etymolog'y ' fallacy

Another flillacy which underlies Mr. Lang's treat-
ment of competing etymologies is that they are all of
equal value. The mathematical odds are x to 1
against this. Several writers lately have apparently
held that if Mr. A. B. differs from Prof. MiiUer on
any point, the latter must necessarily be wrong.
Thus, because many years ago Benfey connected
' Athena ' with the Zend athayana^ a conjecture which
was long ago refuted, we are given to understand
that this etymon is quite as good as any other and
later ones. Curtius again made a conjecture^ nothing
more, respecting the derivation of the name.
Speaking of the root aO, he says, ' whence perliaps
comes Athene.' Preller preferred to connect 'Athena'
with aid, ' wdience aWr^p, "the air," or av6, whence
ai^^o9, " a flower." ' He evidently /iv/^'^r nothing on
the matter, and, as Mr. Lang observes, ' He does not
regard these etymologies as certain.' Very wise of
him. These suggestions of Benfey, Curtius, and
Preller are tentative and conjectural, mere suggestions,
as their authors would freely admit. And it is further

3 ""

36 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

assumed that tliey would still hold to them in the face
of much more evidence to the contrary, a point which
is by no means certain. Prof. Bechtel again explains,

'Athene very simply, no doubt, by Athanatos, the
immortal, but how Athanatos was shortened to
Athene, and why Athene alone was called Athanatos,
the immortal, we are not told ' ( C p. 378).

As against such suggestions as these, which at best
would be what the lawyers call ' bare possibilities,'
Prof. Miiller equates Athena with the Yedic Ahana
(' the Dawn'), proves to the hilt that this equation is
' phonetically irreproachable,' and further that the
central features of the Athena-concept are also in
agreement with tlie idea of a Dawn-goddess. Here is
a view which although of course not a mathematical
certainty fairly holds the field. None of the other
scholars who have treated of the Athena-myth have
been able to equate the goddess with a corresponding
Aryan analogue. According to Furtw angler, the
voice of Athena is the thunder, but he can point to
no analogous Aryan Thunder-goddess ; and the voice
of Athena will equally well represent the thousand
voices and sounds of the morning. Yes, Mr. Lang
may say, and it may equally well represent a dozen
other things. Not so. At this point in the enquiry
the sword of philological Comparative Mythology is
thrown into the balance, which therefore inclines in
favour of the view of Prof. Miiller. I have noticed
divers sneers at his philology. This or that
instance, we are told, was good enough for the fifties
or sixties, and so on„ l^ut the Athena-Ahana equa-
tion has been carefully tested and re -tested by
Prof. Miiller (A' ide C. pp. 406-8), and is quite up to

IlJ MR. LANG S LATEST ATTACK 37

date. Sneers cannot affect the question, and he is
perfectly justified in saying : —

' That Athene or Athana was originally a repre-
sentative of the light of the morning, then of light and
wisdom in general, born from the head of Dyaus
(Divo murdhnaA), and that her name is the same as
the Yedic Ahana, is as certain as anything can be in
comparative mythology ' ( (7. p. 378).

VIII. Reasonable eflfect of differences of opinion

Says Mr. Lang: —

' In all sciences there are differences of opinion
about details ' (i/. IL p. 2). He does not hold that
we should regard them as worthless on this account ;
but proceeds to say that : —

' In comparative mythology there Avas, with rare
exceptions, no agreement at all about results : except
indeed that everybody agreed that Aryan myths were
in the immense majority of instances, to be regarded
as mirror-pictures on earth, of celestial and meteor-
ological phenomena ' (Ibid.),

But surely this was an astonishing agreement on a
general principle ; and it would be easy to show by
hundreds of instances, that there was likewise a
very considerable agreement in matters of detail,
necessitating a further agreement respecting results.
Mr. Lang would be wholly unable to prove his
assertion, and naturally does not attempt to do so.

The points of disagreement among votaries of the
Natural Phenomena Theory chiefly occur in connex-
ion with the names, and, to some extent, with the
concepts of a few prominent divinities, e.g., Athena.

38 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [if

These cases being familiar, make the want of agree-
ment appear to be for more extensive than it really
is. And what are thej, when they loom largest, but
' differences of opinion about details,' and therefore,
according to Mr. Lang, should not prove fatal
to the science. T shall show also that frequently,
e.g.^ in the case of Hermes, these differences are far
more apparent than real.

But supposing that in a science or belief there are
differences, not merely about details, but also about
principles of very grave importance, do we therefore
at once reject it ? Take the instance of Eeligion,
or narrow it to Christianitv. Is this at once to a'o
overboard because men differ on the question of the
Double Procession, Episcopacy, or the Sacraments?
Surely such matters as these are hardly mere details ;
but, if Christianity is therefore worthless as a belief,
scheme, or science, on account of such differences, let
us be told so.

Astronomy, Political Economy (including currency
questions). Geology, have all exhibited by their
votaries the widest difference in principles, and not
merely in details ; but who would therefore abandon
any one of them as worthless or delusive?

IX. Differences of opinion apparent rather than real

]\Iany differences of opinion amongst mythologists
are apparent rather than real. Take the case of
Hermes. According to Dr. Poschcr {Hermes der
Wlndgott) and Sir Geo. Cox, he represents the Wind.
Mr. Ruskin, in liis beautiful Queen of the Air (i. 29),
which, like his other works, combines such
marvellous insiglit and exquisite expression, coupled

ii] mi. lang's latest attack 39

often with most dubiout^ statements, calls Hermes
' the Lord of Cloud.' All quite true, yet not the
whole truth. Many of the Greek gods, like most of
the A^edic gods, are far more complex in character
than this, and Hermes is one of these. Says Prof.
Miiller: —

' Menand takes hira for the twilight, so does Ploix,
and Mehlis sees in him a general solar deity. Instead
of trying to understand why these scholars differ from
each other, their divergence has been represented as
the surest proof of their incompetence. Still Darwin
and Agassiz were allowed to differ without being
called hard names, nor was Comparative Physiology
tabooed because it was progressive.

' The divergence between these scholars was
chiefly due to their attempting to circumscribe too
narrowly the activity of the ancient gods. Hermes, as
the son of Sarama, belongs certainly to the dawn and
the twilight, but the morning wind belongs by right
to the same domain, and as the twilight of morning
and evening was frequently conceived as one [Like the
' star of the morn and eve.'], the god of the morning
may and will finish his course as god of the evening.
Li this way the various characters of Hermes, as
messenger of the gods, as winged, as the robber of the
cows, and as musician, may all be traced back to one
and the same original concept.

' Nor does the view of Mehlis (Die Grundldee des
Hermes., 1877) interfere at all with the other explana-
tions of Hermes, for Hermes as the son of the dawn
may well be called a solar deity, only not a solar
deity in general, but one of many agents dis-
covered in the morning sun. If we take this more

40 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

comprehensive and at the same time more natural
view of Hermes, we shall see how nearly all his
epithets harmonize with his original character '
(6\p. 678).

There is very little of real contradiction in all this;
only a certain imperfection of treatment by persons
harmoniously using the same general principle. As
if a life of Richard 1. merely treated of him as King
of England, ignoring the fact that he was also Duke
of Normandy. As regards epithets, the general con-
cept of a divinity is best arrived at by a thorough
analysis of all his ancient epithets which are not
merely place-names, including of course his principal
name or protagonistic epithet.

X. Differences among'st Anthropolog'ists

Anthropological mythologists differ amongst them-
selves even as others ; but how absurd it would be to
pour ridicule and contempt upon their researches as
a whole, because, forsooth, where Mannhardt sees a
sun-god, Mr. Lang may find a totem, whilst Mr.
Frazer may behold a corn-spirit. Mr. Lang (very
properly) notes such instances of difference; and it is
impossible but that these causes of offence must come.
But heaven forbid that I should deride the valuable
researches of able men on any such ground as this.
All intelligent errors are useful. They set us think-
ing carefully; they frequently indicate where truth
lies, and often powerfully assist us in demonstrating
its force. And this fact I will next try to illustrate
by a consideration of the myth of Demetcr-Erinnys,
as Pausanias spells tlie name.

Il] MR. LANg's latest ATTACK 4 1

XI. The Myth of Demeter-Erinnys

There are some instances of mythic interpretation
where everyone has hitherto gone wrong ; neither A,
1), nor C lias guessed the Hyponoia. And, when this
is the case, the underlying reason of such failure
often consists in the fact, that a method, excellent in
itself, has been incorrectly pressed into the service.
As the Arkadian legend of Demeter-Erinnys has of
late been much handled by various writers, including
Prof. Mliller and Mr. Lang, I shall deal with the
facts as briefly as possible.

Near Thelpousa at a place called Onkeion reigned
Onkos, according to tradition a son of ApoUon. Here
it was (and none of those who have handled the myth
have paid any attention to this circumstance) that
Poseidon (Mr. Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, i. 3,
note, by a shp reads ' Kronos ') followed Demeter.
She changed herself into a mare to avoid him, but
he changed himself into a horse; and she became by
him the mother of Despoina ('the Mistress') and
the horse Areion (' Better', i.e., than other horses).
She was enraged at the outrage, and got the name
Erinnys from her anger, because the Arkadians call
being angry epcvveiv. The same story, with a variant
detail, was also told at Phigaleia, near which place
was an ancient statue of Black Demeter. The god-
dess was represented in human form, except that she
had a mare's head and mane, with figures of serpents
and wild beasts about her head. In one hand she
held a dolphin, in the other a dove. Pausanias sagely
adds, ' They call the goddess Black because she has a
black garment' (Yide Pans. YIIL xxv, xlii). Such,
briefly, is the story.

42 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [m

Prof. Miiller endeavours to explain the tale by
another from the Veda^ a course which prima facie
is quite unexceptionable. This latter story, now
fLUiiiliar to students, tells how the Avorld came
together at the wedding of Tvashtrfs daughter;
how the mother of Yama, the wife of the great
Yivasvat, vanished; how they gave one like her to
A^ivasvat ; ' when that had taken place she bore the
two Asvins, and Saray/yu left behind the two twin
couples' (Yide C. p. 539). Here the Rishi, like
Homer, refers briefly to a famous story with which
his hearers were well acquainted. The great A^edic
commentator Yaska, who lived at least as early as
B.C. 500, explains the allusions just as Eustathios
and Servius interpret passages in Homer and Yergil.
Sara;?yu, we learn, ' assumed the form of a mare and
ran away. A^ivasvat, assuming likewise an equine
form, came together with her, and hence the two
A^vins were born'. Air. Farnell suggests, very
groundlessly, that, as the Hymn does not expressly
say that Sara;zyu took the form of a mare, therefore
this incident ' may be a mere aetiological invention
of the commentator' {Cidts^ i. 2-3, note). Truly it
may^ but the probabilities are infinitely against such
a theory. The poet does not give more detail because
he is merely noticing a familiar tale en passant. How
absurd it would be to suppose that when Eustathios
or Servius add similar detailed information, they are
' inventing! ' What proof is there that such was the
character of Yaska, or of ancient Indian commenta-
tors generally? The whole circumstances leave no
reasonable doubt that the mare-myth was familiar to
the A^edic poet. Air. Lang thinks so ; and goes so
lar as to say tliat these two stories make him incline

ii] MK. Lang's latest attack 43

to or perhaps actually accept the In'pothesis 'that
the ancestors of Greek and Yedic peoples once dwelt
together, had a common stock of savage fables, and a
common or kindred language' (Yide .'??/^7. p. 5).

Now, what do these two stories w^hen compared
with each other really show? This, and no more :
that nothing is more natural than for archaic man to
imagine his gods as assuming animal forms. Why
should he think thus? Well, take the Yedic tale.
The sun suggests the Sun-god ; the Sun-god speeds
across heaven, he races, he is a racer, he is a horse {i.e.,
'Runner," Racer,' Sk.a.sra, Zendas^^a, Slav.a5^?;//,(jk.
LTTTrof;, LKKo<;, Lai. equus/rciit. elm). A horse follows
a mare ; the sun catches up the dawn, the dawn comes
to be spoken of as a mare. From a horse and a mare
come offspring, so comes it from sun and dawn. The
element of twins shows no necessary connexion in
orioiii of the two stories. Such an idea mio^lit arise
independently all over the world. Men were con-
fronted with a great duality in many variant phases,
light and darkness, day and night, sun and moon,
dawn and even, morning and evening star, etc. The
Yedic tale is admittedly concerned with celestial
phenomena, and its archaic simplicity of thought
enables us to comprehend that the animal-trans-
formation in the obscurer story may be a very
natural mode of thought. This way of regarding
natural phenomena is said by some to be poetical, by
others to be unnatural. It is certainly capable of
poetical treatment and feeling, but in itself is singu-
larly prosaic. Supposing when it rained we said,
Heaven is sick. This would surely not be a poetical
trope, but it would be one on the exact lines of our
A^edic tale. As to such a view being unnatural, do

44 hellp:nic ^iythology [ii

not, 0 reader, fall into the absurd error of supposing
that it is unnatural, because it is not our nineteenth-
century -Avay of regardino' the matter. It is we who,
in a sense, are profoundly unnatural in such things.
Mr. Herbert Spencer well reminds us that ' No
servant-girl is surprised at the sun.' Why is this?
On account of her great knowledge ? Xo, but because
she is used to it ; and our civilization, such as it is,
has filled her head with other matters. The archaics
often talked poetry in happy ignorance of so doing ;
the modern (so-called) poet often talks prose in the
same cheerful condition.

But how can we prove that the Vedic story does
not explain the Arkadian? Thus. Mannhardt says
his method of myth-interpretation is : —

' I start from a given collection of facts, of which
the central idea is distinct and generally admitted,
and consequently offers a firm basis for explanation.
I illustrate from this and from well-founded analogies.
Continuing from these, I seek to elucidate darker
things' (Vide M, il/., p. 46). An admirable prin-
ciple; let us apply it here.

XII. The Demeter-Erinnys Myth not a dawn-tale

The ' central idea ' of the Demeter-Erinnys legend
is that it is a tale about a Sea-god and an
Earth-goddess. If anyone denies this, we can have
no common basis on which to discuss the matter.
But, this fact being so, how can any dawn-myth
possibly explain the story? Prof. Miiller, as of
course, strongly feels the difficulty, and makes the
only suggestion possible from his standpoint, viz.,
that for some unknown reason or other, a dawn-tale

ii] MR. Lang's latest attack 45

has Grot entano-led in the black o^arment of the Earth-
a'oddess. His words are : —

' What remains but to admit that the story of the
horse was told originally of another goddess,' i.e.^ of
a Dawn-goddess. ' I know this will sound very
unlikely to Greek scholars [and to everybody else],
yet I see no other way out of our [no, — ' his ']
difficulties' ((7., 545).

I wonder whether Prof. Miiller has really convinced
himself of the correctness of this suggestion. It
would be idle to discuss such a bare possibility.
' Ce n'est pas dans les possibilites qu'il faut etudier
I'homme,' says De Brosses. Mr. Lang naturally
criticises the Professor's hypothesis, rightly in-
sisting : —

' Demeter is a goddess of Earth, not of Dawn.
How, then, does the explanation of a hypothetical
Dawn-mvth [There is no real doubt about this Yedic
Dawn-myth.] apply to the earth?'

And the only answer is, The explanation cannot
apply. Mannhardt, quoted by Mr. Lang (J/. J/.,
pps, 52-3), pitilessly reproduces the discordant con-
jectures anent the Demeter-Erinnys myth. Demeter
= Storm Cloud, Sun-goddess, Earth and Moon
Goddess, Dawn, Night. How wilfully Preller and
the other nine sages mentioned went wrong over the
matter ! They knew that Demeter was and must be
the Earth-goddess. But they deliberately gave
arbitrary and non-natural interpretations of her,
because otherwise they felt themselves unable to
suggest an explanation of the story. Better, far
better, to leave it altogether unexplained than to run
counter to an obvious fact. But the Natural

4^ HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

Phenomena Theory is not at fault, or to bhime,
because it is thus deliberately misapplied. The
suggestions continue :— Poseidon = Sea, Storm-god,
Cloud-hidden Sun, Rain-god. Ridiculous! He is
the Sea-god. All the world knows it, however
certain scholars under stress of weather, produced
by their own fault, may pretend to forget it.
Despoina = Rain, Thunder, Moon.

'Mannhardt decides, after this exhibition of
guesses, that the Demeter legends cannot be ex-
plained as refractions of any natural phenomena in
the heavens ' {Ih. p. 53).

He is perfectly right.

' He concludes that the myth of Demeter Erinnys,
and the parallel Vedic story of Saranyu are " incon-
gruous," and that neither sheds any liodit on the
other' {Ibid).

This is too strong ; I have shown what light the
Vedic tale really does shed upon the Arkadian
legend. But the utter failure of the Aryanists in
this instance, does not touch either their general
method, or its successful application in numberless
cases. How vastly different are these mere conjec-
tures, most of them children of despair, from the
logical, well-worked-out, harmonious theory which
culminates in such a equation as Ahana = Athena.

XIII. Real Character of the Demeter-Erinnys Myth
Is, then, this singular Demeter-Erinnys myth
insoluble? Xot so. It is a non-Arj/an myth; that's
all. Aryan dawn-stories, therefore, will not help
us. The Sea-and-horse god Poseidon is a non-Aryan
divinity. But, the reader will exclaim. Surely

Il] Mil. LANG S LATEST ATTACK 47

Demeter is an Aryan, goddess. Undoubtedly ; I
liave already said as much (Vide suj). p. 20). But,
know, 0 vain man, that to assume that in Hellenic
regions an Aryan name necessarily covers an Aryan
divinity has led to very grave errors. Let me
illustrate. One of the Homilies speaks of Juno as a
goddess of that great Phoenician city Qarth-hadasth
(= Carthada, Solinns ; Lat. Carthago ; Eng. Car-
thage, i.e., ' the New Town.'). Every scholar knows
that, verbatim et literatim, this is absurd. He also
knows that Avhat is meant is, that there was a
Carthao^inian o^oddess Avhom the Romans reo-arded as
the equivalent of the Latin Juno. Or, again, take
the case of Hera Akraia at Korinth. Such a careful
and well-informed writer as Mr. Farnell is perfectly
aware that she is not the Aiyan spouse of Zeus, but
a Phoenician goddess (Vide Cults, i. 201 et seq.).
And so, when a Semitic Earth-goddess has penetrated
into the Peloponnesos, the Greeks, according to
their constant practice, bestow upon her the name
of their own Earth-goddess. And when once we
take this standpoint, every incident in the strange
description of the goddess, her unanthropomorphic
form, her horse's head, cave, serpents, wild beasts,
black garment, dolphin and dove, and the place
Onkeion, all alike become luminous, because all alike
are Semitic traits (Vide Berard, Cultes ArcacL, p. 104
et seq.). Poseidon in name, in mythic position, in
form, is utterly non- Aryan. As the Black Goddess
is unanthropomorphic, so is he. We can see to-day
an archaic representation of him, half man, half fish,
preserved in the museum of the Akropolis. We
can see him so figured on vases, on the coins of
Phoenicia, and on the seals of Babylonia, Ea-Dagon,

48 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

the Fish-god (Vide inf. pp. 102, 192). The Greek
divinities, as I long ago endeavoured to show (Vide
It. B. Jr., Poseidon^ 1872) are essentially anthropo-
morphic. This Sea-god and Earth-goddess are not.
We need not hold with Prof. Midler : —

' Here we see that Greek art shared in its
beo:innings the [unanthropomorphic] failings of other
arts, whether Egyptian, Babylonian, or Indian'

(r,p.538).

We have no Greek art in question ; the art of
these two representations is Phoiniko-Babylonian.
If it be objected that it is a far cry from Babylonia
to Arkadia, I rejoin that it is a still farther cry to
India. It is a far cry from Babylon to St. Andrews,
yet the good folks of that place divide their time-
calculation into sixty seconds make a minute, sixty
minutes make an hour, simply because thousands of
years ago the Babylonians adopted a sexagesimal
notation. I do not here enter further into the details
of the story, e.g.^ the Onkaion as connected with the
Phoenician goddess of Thebes, called Athene Onka
(Of. Pans. IX. xii. 2), and thus on. M. Berard has
treated it at great length. I wish now merely to
show (1) That the Aryanistic Natural Phenomena
explanations of the myth are baseless ; and (2)
That this circumstance in no way affects the general
application of the Natural Phenomena Theory, or
the general theory of Prof. Miiller ; and also to
indicate (3) That the myth is non- Aryan in origin,
and that the originals of Poseidon and this 'Black
(so-called) Demeter ' are the Euphratean Ea, Lord of
the Deep (which includes the sea), and his consort
the Earth-goddess Davkina (' Lady -of- the -Earth ').

ir] MR. Lang's latest attack 49

XIV. Mannhardt on the Demeter-Erinnys Myth

Mannliardt was a great student. He busied him-
self alike with the anthropological and the natural-
phenomena aspect of mythology ; and consequently
is claimed by both camps as an ally. But there is
really nothing to dispute about ; one side of his shield
was golden, the other silver. Evidently disgusted
by the baseless Aryanistic speculations anent the
myth, he plunges into an opposite extreme. His
excruciating etymology of so simple a name as
Demeter has already been mentioned (Vide sup.
p. 16) ; and he proceeds to tackle the tale thus (A^ide
M. M, p. 51) :—

' Poseidon is the lord of wind and wave.' So far
as the wind is concerned, this proposition is far too
broad (Vide G\d.di^ioi\Q^ Juventus Mundi., pp. 244-5).
' There are waves of corn, under the wind. When
the Swabian rustic sees the waves running over the
corn, he says, Da lauft das Pferd^ and Greeks before
Homer would say, in face of the billowing corn,
There run horses,'' They might, or they might not.
' And Homer says that the horses of Erichthonius,
children of Boreas [/.6., the Winds], ran over corn-
field and sea.' Yes ; but Poseidon is not the Wind
or winds, so that he is unconnected with these
children of Boreas. As some of those at whom he
laughs make Poseidon (the Sea-god) into the sun;
so Mannhardt, under similar stress from his theory,
makes him into the wind. Had it been Hermes,
there might have been something plausi])le to be
said for this idea. Mannhardt quotes some more
' peasant proverbs,' but they are not Arkadian
proverbs, and they were not said of Poseidon. We

50 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

must stick to the story. If we allow that the Sea-
god was the Wind, how can w^e object to the view
that he was the Sun. The sun (lasion) does marry
the cultivated earth (Demeter) ; the wdnd does not.
And yet Mannhardt can conclude : —

' It is a probable hypothesis [Observe, even the
author of it can put it no higher.] that the beUef in
the wedding of Demeter and Poseidon comes from
the sight of the waves passing over the cornfield.'

' It is very neat/ says Mr. Lang. But he doesn't
believe it^ and right he is. AYhat becomes, on these
lines, of the Twins? If the wind bowinsf the o-rain
reminds us of a horse, w^hy should the grain itself
remind us of a mare? How^ does the wdnd follow^
and w^ed corn, and make it yield increase? How is
corn, in any sense, draped in black? How does
Mannhardt explain the Onkaion, or the peculiar
statue of the goddess with her symbols and adjuncts?
He can't explain one of these things. His ' hypo-
thesis,' as he calls it, is more utterly and obviously
baseless than any one of those which he condemns, a
circumstance which shows how infinitely easier it is
to criticise than to create. Says Mr. Lang : —

' A certain myth of Loki in horse-form comes into
memory, and makes me wonder how Mannhardt
would have dealt with that too literal narrative.'

And he slyly adds : —
' Is Loki a corn-spirit ? '

Umps ! ' The rest is silence.'

A verbal point in the tale remains for notice. As
we have seen, the Arkadians used the word 'epivveiv
(= ' To-act-like-an-Erinys ') colloquially in the sense

Il] MK. LANG's latest ATTACK 5 1

of ' to-be-in-a-fury.' Some wonderful philologists,
opponents of Prof. Milller, have actually derived
'Epcvv^ (a 'Fury') from 'epcvvecv^ an admirable instance
of Hysteron-proteron^ or the cart before the horse.
How anyone could be said ' to -act-like -a- Fury '
before Furies had been thought of, does not appear.
I suppose we shall be told ere long that ' critic ' is
derived from the verb 'to criticise,' and that Mausolos
obtained his name from his mausoleum. I have
omitted to notice a ' guess ' of Mr. Lang anent the
Horse-Demeter. ' The gods in savage myths are
usually beasts. As beasts they beget anthro-
pomorphic offspring. This is the regular rule in
totemism.' (i£J/. p. 68). Quite so. But Poseidon
was ignorant of this rule, and so begat a horse,
Areion.

XV. A ' Disease of Language '

Says Prof. Mliller:- —

' The question of mythology has become in fact a
question of psychology.'

This circumstance, of course^ gives it its great
interest and importance.

' As our psyche becomes objective to us chiefly
through language ' mythology has become ' a ques-
tion of the science of language. This will explain
why, when trying to explain the inmost nature of
mythology, I called it a Disease of Language rather
than of Thought.'

He admits that the expression was ' startling,' but
thinks it has done good, and continues : —

' After I had [rightly or wrongly] fully explained

in my Science of Thought that language and thought

are inseparable, and that a disease of language is

4 *

52 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [n

therefore the same as a disease of thought, no doubt
ought to have remained as to what I meant' (C.
pp. 68-9).

He explains that he was thinking of far more than
mere misapprehensions, e.g.^ taking ' ixrjKa, flocks, for
fiTjXa, apples,' or than false etymology, wrong pro-
nunciation, and ' similar accidents.' He meant to
refer to that state of language and thought which
represents ' the Supreme God as committing every
kind of crime,' — which, in fact, puzzles us, by pre-
senting to us extraordinary tales about the divinities.
These stories, which much tormented some ancient
Greek thinkers, it is impossible to take literatim et
verbatim. They must therefore contain a Hyponoia,
an Undermeaning. But what is this ? Now I quite
admit that the expression ' disease of lanoaiao-e '
disease of thought,' is not a happy one. Prof.
Miiller quotes ' Mr. Horatio Hale, the Nestor of
scientific ethnologists,' who writes : —

' The expression " a disease of language " was too
sweeping, but it comprises a large measure of truth.'

Mr. Lang, as might be expected, pounces upon
this phrase ; and, more suo, makes an exquisite
pleasantry touching the measles, which will probably
be thought a perfect side-splitter by Those-who-go-
into-these-things-a-little (Vide sup, p. 33). Dis-
regarding the Professor's explanation that, in his
terminology, 'disease of language' = 'disease of
thought,' Mr Lang again and again represents Proi.
Miiller as teaching that language, as distinct from
thought, and 'especially language in a state of
" disease " ' has ' been the great source of the mytho-

Il] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 53

logy of the world ' {M. M. p. x). That which I
understand Prof. Miiller to mean by the expressions
' disease ' of language or of thought, is what I should
rather call the outcome of a failure of memory, such
failure being intensified by the ever shifting significa-
tions of words. Illustrations will make clearer the
views of Prof. Miiller and Mr. Lang on the matter.
Says the latter : —

' To me, and indeed to Mr. Max Midler, the ugly
scars [ :=: The extraordinary stories of mythology.]
were the problem . . . The phenomena which the
philological school of mythology explains by a disease
of language we [' Untutored ' or ' Unawakened ' An-
thropologists, I presume.] would explain by survival
from a savage state of society and from the mental
peculiarities observed among savages ' {M. M, p. 5).

Very well. So long as these phenomena are really
explained, let the instrument be what it may. We
will take an ' ugly-scar '-tale : — Isis and Osiris Avere
linked in love in their mother's womb (Vide Renouf,
IieL And. Egypt^ p. 111). Now, Open Sesame!

Is such a little incident common to ' a savage state
of society,' and therefore one which naturally arises
in the mind of a tale -inventor ? Or, if not, what are
'the mental peculiarities observed among savages'
which cause such an idea ? The comparative mytho-
logist, the disciple of the Natural Phenomena Theory,
says, and, notwithstanding Mr. Frazer (Yide sup.
p. 14), with the support of Egyptologists, that Isis
(Dawn) and Osiris (Sun), regarded as a harmonious
pair, are hidden together in the womb of Night. The
story is neither silly nor filthy. It merely results
from the fact that archaic man, and herein much re-

54 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

sembliiig modern man, measured all things by himself,
and regarded what he saw from an anthropomorphic
point of view. The ' ugly scars ' disappear. The
last part of Mr. Lang's sentence is very elastic ; and
if he should chance to mean that this anthropomorph-
ism is amongst ' the mental peculiarities ' of modern
savages, then he would probably be really more in
agreement with Prof. Miiller than he supposes.

So, in innumerable myths, which, when regarded
as relating doings such as those of human beings,
involve gods and heroes in every species of cruelty
and immorality, the scars will at once disapper Avhen
we realize that man is talking, in anthropomorphic
language, of the phenomena, celestial or otherwise, of
the world around, as they strike upon his conscious-
ness. But, as the years roll on, the original meaning
of the sacred old tale fades avray, whilst the words
remain, the shell is carefully preserved. We are left
witli a letter which kills, and deprived of a spirit
which gives life ; and the ultimate result is practically
a disease alike of language and of thought. That
this process has actually been passed through by man,
has been demonstrated by mythologists in hundreds
of instances. That numbers of such stories cannot
possibly be explained by savage states of society, or
by the mental peculiarities of modern savages, T have
just shown and will show again (Vide inf. p. 73).

XVI. Alleged Egyptian Totemism

Mr. Lang gives a careful and valuable definition of
Totemism : —

' A state of society and cult, found most fully
developed in Australia and North America, in which

ll] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 55

sets of persons, believing themselves to be akin by
blood, call each such set by the name of some plant,
beast, or other class of objects in natm^e.' To its
beast, etc. each kin pays ' more or less respect [This
is elastic], usually abstains from killing, eating, or
using it (except in occasional sacrifices) ; is apt to
claim descent from or relationship with it/ and
^uses its effigy' in various ways {M. M. p. 71).

As archaic Egypt furnishes us with an example of
various sacred animals and of gods in animal form,
it presents a tempting field for annexation by the
Totemist. On this point Prof. Mllller observes :—

' It might be possible to explain every kind of ther-
iolatry by totemism. Why should not all the gods
of Egypt with their heads of bulls, and apes and cats
be survivals of totemism? But though it would
relieve Egyptologists of a great difficulty, none of the
leading hieroglyphic scholars seems as yet to have
availed himself of this remedy' {C. p. 202).

To this Mr. Lang practically replies as did Panurge
to Master Pvondibilis, ' There did I wait for you/
saying : —

' Mr. Max Mllller asks if '' any Egyptologists have
adopted" the totem theory. He is apparently
oblivious of Professor Sayce's reference to a pre-
historic age, "when the religious creed of Egypt
was still totemism" ' {M, M. p. 72. Vide Sayce, Herod.
p. 344. Mr. Lang does not give the reference).

Mr. Lang further quotes Robertson Smith, who
states that : —

' Ll Egypt the gods themselves are totem-deities,
i.e., personifications or individual representations of

5 6 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

the sacred clianicter and attributes which in the
])urely totem stage of religion were ascribed without
distinction to all animals of the holy kind ' (Vide
JZJ/. p. 76).

And here I will make Mr. Lang a present of
another quotation from Prof. Sayce, who, speaking
of the Babylonian Istar-Gilgames myth, says : —

' Here popular tradition has preserved a recollec-
tion of the time when the gods of Babylonia were
still regarded as eagles, and horses, and lions. We
are taken back to an epoch of totemism, when the
tribes and cities of Chalda^a had each its totem, or
sacred animal, to whom it offered divine worship,
and who eventually became its creator-god ' {Rel.
And. Bahs, p. 279).

Mr. Lang concludes : —

' Robertson Smith and Mr. Sayce are " scholars/'
not mere unscholarly anthropologists ' {M. M, p. 76).

Now let it be granted, for the sake of argument,
that Robertson Smith and my friend Prof. Sayce,
are absolutely correct in the above statements. We
ai-e all aware that Prof. Sayce, of whom I speak with
the utmost respect, has a great knowledge of Egypt,
ancient and modern. But would he style hhnself an
'Egyptologist'? I think not. Robertson Smith
certainly was not an Egyptologist.

Next, what is it exactly that Robertson Smith and
Prof. Sayce affirm in these quotations? Do they
attribute to arcliaic Egypt and Chaldaea totemism on
the lines of Mr. Lang's definition? Most certainly
not. Do they state that there was a time in archaic
Egypt and Chaldaea when a distinct set of persons

ii] MR. Lang's latp:st attack ^']

inhabited each nome or district, beUeved themselves
to be akin by blood, called each such set by the
name of their totem-plant, beast, etc., abstained from
killing, etc. such totem, and claimed descent from
or relationship with it? They do not; nor is there
any evidence that such a state of things ever existed.
They merely use the words ' totem,' ' totemism,' in
a somewhat vague and general sense. Thus,
Prof. Sayce defines his Chaldaean totem as a 'sacred
animal ' ; but, as Mr. Lang well observes : —

' Animal attributes, and symbols, and names in
religion are not necessarily totemistic ' (ilf. M. p. 72).

The fact is that Mr. Lang has incautiously applied
his definition of totemism, in all its rigour, to the
statements of these two scholars ; and has assumed
that, when they spoke of totemism, they imagined it
thus. And to return to the statement of Prof.
Miiller. Not one undoubted Egyptologist from
Champollion down to Maspero and De Morgan is a
believer in Egyptian totemism. Lastly, it is clear
from Strabo (xvii. 40) that all Egypt worshipped
the ox, cat, hawk, and ibis ; therefore there were no
totem clans (properly so-called) in the country.
Result : — Exit totemism from the Nile A^alley.

XVII. Another instance of exploded Totemism

In his Custom and Mytli^ 1st edit. p. 119, note,
Mr. Lang says: —

' Though Plutarch mentions an Athenian 76^09,
the Ioxida3, which claimed descent from and revered
asparagus, it is probable that genuine totemism had

58 HELLEXIC :\rYTHOLOGY [ll

died out of Greece many hundreds of years before
even Homer's time.'

He again (p. 264) recurs to this extraordinar}^
statement, which he was very fond of introducing
when reviewing books, and remarks : —

' We know from Pkitarch that, in addition to
families claiming descent from divine animals, one
Athenian 76^09, the loxidae, revered an ancestral
plant, the asparagus.'

This was indeed an admirable instance in illustra-
tion of Mr. Lang's totem istic theories. There was
only a single jar about it, but that was rather a nasty
one. Plutarch says nothing of the kind. In 1884
I pointed out this fact in the Academij ; and Mr. Lang
has since withdrawn the statement. But it is very
needful to verify quotations ; for, as we shall agahi
have oj^portunity of observing, the enthusiastic
Totemist's eyesight often deceives him.

XVIII. Apollon, Mr. Lang-, and the Mouse

In his Custom and Myth^ Mr. Lang has an amusing
article called Apollo and the Mouse. It dealt with
the cult of Apollon Smintheus, afilvOo^ being a local
name in the Troad for a mouse; and endeavoured to
prove the existence of a mouse -totem in regions
Hellenic. In support of this theory Mr. Lang
explored Egypt, but found, on the authority of Prof.
Sayce, that ' mice were not sacred in Egypt.' But,
if we cannot catch a mouse, let us get a rat ; and
says Mr. Lang : —

' Eats, however, were certainly sacred, and as little

ii] MR. Lang's latest attack 59

distinction is taken, in myth, between rats and
mice as between rabbits and hares. The rat was
sacred to Ea, the Sun-god, and (like all totems)
was not to be eaten' {Custom and Myth, 2nd edit,
revised, p. 113).

Wilkinson {Ancient Egyptians, iii. 294) is quoted
in support of this statement. I refer thither, but
find nothing to the effect that the rat is sacred.
But I do find (p. 259) the rat tabled as ' Not sacred.'
I protest, as Mr. Lang and Tommy Merton w^ould
say, I cannot understand this. And in the ' revised '
edition too ! Mr. Lang refers to the Book of the Dead,
cap. xxxiii, to show that the rat was ' sacred to Ra.'
But the passage in question (ap. llenouf ) reads : —

' Stop ! or thou shalt eat the rat which Ra
execrateth, and gnaw the bones of a putrid she-cat.'

It is quite clear that the execrable rat and ' putrid
she-cat ' were not sacred to Ra, the Sun-god. The
Rat thus refused to come to Mr. Lang's assistance
against his fellow the Mouse, and the latter strongly
objected to be made into a totem. Mr. Lang, how-
ever, had found six 'notes' (A^ide M. M. p. 80) which
seemed to point to a Greek mouse-totem ; and, em-
boldened by apparent success, had applied similar
arguments to the Bear, the Bull, and the Pig, ' and
so forth.'

XIX. Rout of Mr. Lang by the Mouse
Says Mr. Lang : —

' My theory connecting Apollo Smintheus ....
with a possible [All things out of the mathematics

6o HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

are possible.] pre-liistoric mouse-totem, gave me,
I confess, considerable satisfaction ' {Ih. p. 84).

But, at this juncture the Mouse, still desperately
resisting, found an unexpected ally in no less a
person than Mr. Frazer, armed with his Golden
Bough. Mr. Frazer showed, what indeed various
ancient writers had showed before him, that ' mice
and other vermin are worshipped for prudential reasons
— to get them to go away.' Mr. Ward Fowler, in the
Classical Beview^ was of the same opinion. So also
were Strabo and Pausanias (Vide inf, p. 211), though
Mr. Lang had not noticed their opinions until too
late. The Mouse, — it must have ' Lick-man,' named
in the BatracJiomyomachm^ — placing himself at the
head of this phalanx, bore down with redoubled
energy upon Mr Lang, who (small blame to him)
turned and fled. When he recovered breath he
said : —

' Apollo may be connected with mice, not as a god
who superseded a mouse-totem, but as an expeller of
mice, like the worm-kilhng Heracles, and the Locust-
Heracles, and the Locust- Apollo. Thus the Mouse-
Apollo (Smintheus) would be merely a god noted for
his usefulness in getting rid of mice, and any worship
given to mice . . . would be mere acts of propitiation.
There would be no mouse-totem in the back-ground.'

Just so. Mr. Lang, however, does not ' feel quite
convinced — the mouse being a totem ... in Egypt.'
But, as we have seen {Sup. p. 58), it wasn't. Our
Author consoles himself by rejecting Grohmann's
dogma that the Mouse is ' the Lightning ' ; and surely
this proposition is not of faith, but of pious opinion.
I confess I think that one of this triad, ApoUon,

Il] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 6 1

Mr. Lang, and the Mouse looks somewhat ^ ridiculous.'
Apollon is untouched, and the Mouse victorious.
But all honour to Mr. Lang for recognising the force
of the hostile evidence, and admitting that anthropo-
logists, as well as philologists and politicians may
be great at leaps in the dark. Mere ordinary Philis-
tines, especially those residing at Ashqelon, Gaza,
Ekron, Ashdod, and Gath, have known the truth all
along (Vide 1 Sam. vi).

XX. Artemis, Arkas and the Bear

Deprived of his totem -mouse Mr. Lang sadly
exclaims : —

' I do hanker after the Arcadian bear as, at least, a
possible survival of totemism . . . Will Mr. Frazer
give the Arcadian bear " the benefit of the doubt?" '
{M. M. p. 87).

' I am not sure that the corn-spirit accounts for
the Sminthian mouse in all his aspects^ nor for the
Arcadian and Attic bear-rites and myths of Artemis.
Mouse and bear do appear in Mr. Frazer's catalogue
of forms of the corn- spirits, taken from Mannhardt '
{Ihlcl),

This is a very just scepticism. The Corn- spirit
threatens to extend his ravages even into districts
where there is no corn.

' But the Arcadians, as we shall see, claimed
descent from a bear' (Ibid.).

This we shall not see, for they made no such claim.
What says Pausanias? Why that Arkas (probably
a Ph. name. Cf. Ph. Arci, now Arkos, in Spain; the
Archites, Jos. xvi. 2 ; etc.) introduced the sowing of

62 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

corn, and taught his people how to make bread and
weave and other things, and that in his reign the
country was called Arkadia instead of Pelasgia and
the inhabitants Arkadians instead of Pelasgians (Paus.
YIII. iv. 1). The Arkadians were not descended from
Arkas, even as the English are not descended from
Alfred. These unfortunate errors in fact on the part
of Mr. Lang, arising from carelessness and ' smatter-
ing,' cause a just suspicion of his quotations and
general statements.

Next, as to Arkas himself. Was he said to be
simply and actually the child of a bear? Distinguo^
as Mr. Lang would say. The Arkadian legend
spoke of him as the child of a ' Most-beautifal '
(Kallisto) woman, who, after he had been begotten,
was changed into a bear. And notwithstanding this
alleged metamorphosis the Greek mind continued to
regard Kallisto as a woman, not as a bear ; and it is
as a woman that she appeared alike on the coinage of
Arkadia and on the canvas of Polygnotos, though in
the latter instance accompanied by her bear-skin.
Whatever may have been the origin of all this, surely
it is quite distinct from Totemism as (very properly)
defined by Mr. Lang. The Arkadians did not claim
descent from a bear, did not call themselves ' bears ';
in a word, did not fulfil those necessary conditions
which mark the real Totemist. Truly there was a
certain connexion between them and bears. Until
quite late times the animal was found in the country
(Cf. Paus. VIIL xxiii. 6); and they were acquainted
with the constellations of the Gi'eat and Little Bear,

Prof. M filler deals with the story at length, but
not happily ; and this circumstance arises, as we shall
see, from his mythological standpoint. Mr. Lang

Il] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 63

quotes the Professor's remarks (Ji. M. p. 137 et seq.)
and criticises his 'explanation.' I doubt whether
Prof. Miiller gives any exph^nation. He suggests
that ' Areas reminded the Arcadians of arldos' If it
did, we shall never know the fact. I shall, with the
assistance of Bachofen and M. Victor Berard, whose
^Yovk DeV Or igine des Cidtes Arcadlens (1894), is one
of the finest specimens of ' modern mythology,' place
another interpretation on the legend.

The learned and sober researches of Bachofen,
Der Baer in den Religionen des Alterthums, 1863,
who has carefully examined most of the instances in
classical literature where the bear is referred to, or
where bear-names occur, and who also gives various
illustrations of the bear in classical art, furnish the
following result : —

The Ancients were greatly struck, not so much by
the size, etc., of the animal, as by her extraordinary
affection for her young ; and attributed to her strange
and special powers of licking them into shape, etc.
Briefly, the maternal, and hence fostering and kindly,
aspect of the Bear, which in Greek is always feminine,
T) "ApKTo^, ' the fern . being used even when both sexes are
included ' (Liddell and Scott, in voc), is the leading
idea in the my thologico- religious treatment of the
animal. The Semitic world equally appreciated this
same characteristic, as, e.g., divers Biblical proverbial-
isms show; and the bear of the shores of the Medi-
terranean stands before us as Ursa MatronaIis,£i symbol
of that fostering love which will do and dare all on
behalf of the objects of its affection. Such an animal
naturally became connected with the cult of the
great non-Aryan Goddess-mother of Western Asia

64 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

(Cf. Lucian, Pe7n tes Syries Theou^ xli. ; Renan,
Phenicie^ p. 292; 0. Keller, Thiere des Massisch.
Alterth, pp. 106-128; Berard, Cultes Arcad. p. 130;
etc.). According to Porphyry (^Pythagorou Bios, xli.)
Pythagoras, who was a native of Samos, a locality
famous for the worship of the Great Goddess, whom
there the Hellenes, not unnaturally, identified
with their Hera, speaking ' symbolically and in
mystic fashion,' calls bears, ' the hands (z.^., assistants)
of Rhea' (ra? dpKTov^ Tea? ^eZpa?), meaning apparently
that they were exemplars and supporters of the
dlymtas matronalis. And this leads us directly to
Helike (Ursa Major) and Kynosoura {Ursa Minor).
For, when Rhea was about to give birth to Zeus,
she retired to Kretan Lyktos, and hid the infant in
a cave (Hesiod, Theog. 477-84), where he was nur-
tured by two bears. And Aratos (PJiainom. 31-5),
repeating the ancient story from Agaosthenes of
Naxos, identifies this pair with the constellation-
bears. All, or nearly all, of the mythological stories
al)Out the bear, show the animal in the same kindly
light, and frequently in a Semitic connexion. A
bear suckles Atalante, in whom 'nous retrouvions
tous les attributs de la deesse syrienne ' (Berard,
Cultes Arcad, p. 131). Long ago Otfried Milller
showed that Kallisto = Artemis Kallistc; and this
latter personage is no more the Aryan sister of
ApoUon than is Artemis Ephesia, but the Semitic
' Reine-Mere,' connected with a constellation (the
TPV^'^i- stars) also called ' Most beautiful.' ' Comme
le mot semitique \Noema\ dont il est la traduction,
KaXkLdTTj celcbrc tout a la fois la beaute et la bonte
de la desse ' {lb. pp. 202-3). To make the story
intelligible to later ages, a strictly human element is

ii] MR. Lang's latest attack 65

introduced in Euhemeristic fashion. Zeus becomes
the faithless husband, Hera the jealous wife, Artemis
the avengino; friend. But all this is merely a layer
of dust and ashes over the original flicts and beliefs.
Arkas (Gk. ' The Bright-one'), son of Zeus Lykaios
(=: Baal Khamraan or Hamon = Gk. Palaimon),
and the beautiful (' Kalliste ') Phoenician goddess, at
once virgin and mother, dies and comes to life again,
and also exhibits the famiUar Semitic aspect of
triplicity. " Areas, le heros-enfant, le dieu-soleil, est
un triple dieu, Tinfernal Apheidas, le celeste Elatos,
et le fort Azan ' (lb. p. 269). Azan, whom Pausanias
calls the eldest son of Arkas, is merely the Semitic
Sun-god as Aziz or Azan (^the Strong'). We meet
with him in Boiotia as Azeus, in Syria as Azon, said
to be a son of Melqarth ( = Melikertcs) and founder
of Aza, otherwise Gaza. Arkas naturally becomes
ArldophyJax Bootes^ so Avell known to Homer, the
' Bearward-Ploughman,' Herdsman or Shouter — at
the Bear, who, with her Sister, guards the Pole.
The introduction of constellation-figures is alone
an almost certain indication of Semitic influence.
Mr. Lang once wrote in a magazine : —

' The Greeks received from the dateless past of
savage intellect the myths, and the names of the
constellations.'

It is perfectly easy to write imaginary history
such as this. You only require invention -f pen,
ink, and paper. And statements of the kind are
doubtless quite good enough for ' the public which
" goes into these things a little " ' ; and, differing but
slightly from a country yokel, accepts with open
mouth almost anything it may see in print, especially

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

if a prominent name be attached to the statement.
Mr. Lang doubtless beUeved what he said, and may
believe it still. But it is scarcely fair to the unfor-
tunate public to write so recklessly. As a matter of
fact the Greeks received the constellation-names,
which we now use, and nearly all the stories con-
nected with them, not from any savages, but from
the highly civilized Phoenicians, who, in turn, like
the ancient Arabians (Vide Hommel, Ueber den
Ursprung unci das Alter der arahischen Sternnamen^
1891), had received many of these names, e.g., the
Wain, the Goat {Aix-CapeJla), a Aurigae^ and the
Eagle, from the archaic civilization of the Euphrates
Valley.

And thus much touching Kallisto, the Arkadians,
and the Bear.^

1 I have for many years been engaged in collecting material
for a work to be entitled Researches into the Origin of the
Primitive Constellations of the Greeks, Phoenicians, and Baby-
lonians. Ideler's admirable Sternnamen was published in 1809,
and since then the subject has been almost entirely in the hands
of ' smatterers,' who have naturally aired nearly every possible
absurdity of assertion and conjecture. If my health permits
me to finish it, I can wish no more success for this work than
that it should be regarded as Ideler up to date. In a special
monograph (The Celestial Equator of Aratos, with 33 illustrations,
in the Transactions of the Ninth International Congress of
Orientalists, London, 1892, vol. ii., pp. 445-85), I have shown
that the astronomical statements preserved in the Phainomena
of Aratos, and hitherto regarded as inexplicable, were derived
from Babylonia, and were perfectly correct for that locality,
cir. B.C. 2084. In The Heavenly Display, (Longmans, 1885) I
have given the only accurate translation of the Phainomena (as
a basis for the study of archaic astronomy) which has yet
appeared in English. This work contains an Introduction,
Notes, Appendices, and (38 illustrations of constellation-figures'.

U] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 67

XXI. The Brauronian Bear-cult

We have next to deal with the bear on Attic
ground. Twenty years ago I made a careful study
of the Brauronian bear- cult (Vide The Great
Bionysiak Myth, i. 239 etseq.\ ii. 134 et seq.), which
has recently attracted much attention in a totemistic
connexion. I showed in detail how absurd it is to
confound the Brauronian goddess, Artemis- Or thia
(=r Sem. Asherah, ' The Upright,' the Phoenician
goddess of the phallic stone-cones)-Taurikc, with the
Aryan sister of Apollon. Although the exact reason
is at times somewhat difficult to ])erceive, nothing is
more certain than that the Greeks again and again
applied the name of Artemis to foreign divinities,
supposed to resemble her, more or less, the most
familiar instance of which is the unanthropomorphic
Polymastos of Ephesos, but the most remarkable,
the Eurynome-Derketo Artemis of Phigaleia, half-
woman, half-fish. Artemis of Brauron, like Artemis-
Kalliste-Kalisto, is a Semitic divinity (Vide Berard,

many of them taken from Euphratean Boundary-stones. In
another monograph {The Archaic Limar Zodiac, in the Pro-
ceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, Dec. 1895-
Jan. 1896) I have proved that the seven complete specimens of
a lunar zodiac which have come down to us, viz., the Persian,
Sogdian, Khorasmian, Chinese, Indian, Arab, and Coptic
schemes, are all variants, and derived from a Sumero-Babylonian
original. And I mention these circumstances, in order that
tbe reader may perceive that I do not offer an opinion on
questions connected with the ancient constellation-figures,
witbout having first given long and careful attention to the
subject. If therefore he should hear my views treated with
contempt and merely asserted to be baseless, let him remember
to take such ' criticism ' at its proper value. He will not meet
with any refutation of my general position.

68 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

Cultes Arcad. pp. 132-3) bearing an Aryan goddess-
name, and actually a patroness of the bear (Vide sup.
Sec. xx). Mr. Lang truly says that his account of
the Brauronian ritual is inferior to that of Mr. L. E.
Farneh, whose Cults of the Greek States (1896), only
the two first volumes of which have appeared, is a
work of which any scholar might well be proud.
As Mr. Farnell is mainly of the same school as
Mr. Lang, I will examine his view of the matter, and
assail the fort rather than the faihJe (Vide M, M.
p. 102). Mr. Farnell gives an excellent resume of
the facts : —

'We learn from Aristophanes that it was the
custom for young maidens, clothed in a saffron robe,
to dance in the Brauronian ceremonies of Artemis,
and that in this dance they, as well as the priestess, were
called " bears " ; the saffron robe was possibly worn
in order to imitate the tawny skin of the bear. . .
The dance was called apKrela, and the maidens who
took part in it were between five and ten years of
age. . . The scholiast says that Artemis ordered
every maiden [for a reason given] ... to dance the
bear-dance before marriage and to pass round the
temple wearing the saffron robe. . . The dance was
a kind of initiation by which young girls before
arriving at puberty were consecrated to the goddess '
{Cults, ii. 43G-7).

Mr. Farnell, who regards Brauronis as the Aryan
Artemis, next states that * the goddess and her
worshippers and the bear were considered as of one
nature.' This is only true in so far as they all were
representatives of feminality. He then introduces
divers ' totemistic illustrations,' to which I beg the

Il] MR. LANg's latest ATTACK 69

reader's careful attention. According to proper
totemistic principles, a bear ought to have been
' offered in a sacrificial meal to the goddess on solemn
occasions.' Unfortunately, however, these regulations
Avere grossly violated ; as ' the authorities make it
clear that a goat or hind was usually the animal of
sacrifice.' He proceeds : —

' The substitution of the goat for the bear ' —

Stop ! Stop ! My good sir ; you have not yet
proved that a bear ever was sacrificed on the occa-
sion, so how could there be a ' substitution of the
goat ' ? But let this pass. ' The substitution of the
goat for the bear was a violation of the logic of the
ceremony.' Shocking! Especially since the fact
gives a nasty jar to the totemistic theorist. Take
courage, however, and we shall get over this. Bears,
it seems, were scarce. The little maidens would
have sacrificed them, if they could have caught any.
But Pausanias (1. xxxii. 1) says there were bears, in
his time, on Mount Parnes, not very far off; and the
Arkadian oak -groves still sheltered them. Moreover,
as he remarks (VIII. xvii. 3), private individuals have
before now brought white bears from Thrace, but
then white was not the rio:lit colour for Brauron.
Mr. Farnell's last suggestion in explanation of this
'logical' difficulty anent the sacrifice is quite worthy
of Prof. Aguchekikos himself. Perhaps, he surmises,
' chance may here have put the ritual into the hands of
a goat-tribe.' It would be well first to show that there
really were any Bear-tribes or Goat-tribes in the
locality. And it is truly instructive to what straits
the logical application of unsound premisses will
reduce a very able man.

JO HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

Avoiding all such totemistic imaginings, we see
at a glance how exactly the Braiironian ritual
harmonizes with the views of Bachofen and
M. Berard. Each little Attic maid, as a representative
of feminality, is solemnly dedicated to the goddess
connected alike with virginity and with motherhood.
And as the Bear, regarded as Ursa Matronalis^ is
sacred to this Artemis, strangely unlike the virgin
sister of Apollon, so these maidens, the matrons
of the future, are her bears. How simple it all
really is ! And it will be observed that the bear-
maidens passed ' round the temple,' just as the
celestial Kallisto passes slowly round the sacred
spot occupied by the Pole-star, called in Akkadian
Tir-anna, = Bab. -As. Day cm- same (' Judge-of-
heaven ') ; so that the dance, like many others, may
have been connected with, and, to some extent,
imitative of, the eternal choric stellar dance,
which ' the moving gems of night,' as Aratos calls
them, ever perform around the central and highest
throne.

But, alas, for poor Mr. Lang ! Mr. Frazer's
encroaching Corn-spirit has frightened away his
Totem-pig and Totem-bull (Vide M. M. p. 8G). The
Mouse, as we have seen, would have none of him.
And now, saddest of all, the Totem-bear vanishes ;
and, like the objectionable Apparition which annoyed
Lord Lyttleton, leaves him in a similarly melancholy
solitude. Well might he exclaim : —

I never loved a totem-mouse,

And trained it through my books to follow ;
But it would vanish from my house

Of cards, and leave me with Apollo.

Il] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 7 1

1 hankered for a totem-bear, —

Found one exactly to my mind ;
When, lo ! it disappeared in air,

And left but Artemis behind ! ^

This is all very sad. Let us pass on.

XXII. A Key of Knowledge from Mr. Lang's Bunch

Mr. Lang is only occasionally constructive. On
the whole it suits him better to carry on a light
guerilla Avarfare against the faible rather than against

1 The Aryan name "ApTefxic, Dor. 'Apra/xt?, has never yet
been satisfactorily explained. We may gather from the general
concept of the goddess, that it will probably be some simple
epithet of the moon. Let us consider it on these lines. We
find the Aryan roots ar and H, meaning ' to go ' ; from the former
comes the Arianform arta, ' right,' i.e., ' going on straight,' and
the Avestic ' aretha (ar-^rta, apery]?), ce qui va droit; justice,
droit ' (De Harlez, Manuel de la Langue de VAvesta, p. 119).
Arta appears in many Persian proper names (Vide Canon
Rawlinson, Herod, iii. 445) ; and is at times regarded as having
an intensitive force, e.g., Pers. Arta-syras, = ' the Very-Bright '
or ' the Bright-sun.' From the root ri is formed the Vedic rita,
meaning primarily ' the straight line ' ; then, what is straight,
fixed, permanent, right, luminous, divine law, kosmic order, etc.
We find as a man's name Eita-hhkga= Gk.— Per. 'Apra^a^T??.
So far, then, in Gk. apre, apra we obtain the ideas of going, bright-
ness, rectitude, purity, and order. Mts is simply the Gk. /xets, ^>}s
' month; ' visible part of the moon,' Sk. mas, ' moon.' "Apra/zis
is primarily merely ' the Going-moon,' just as the Moon is called
'Iw (' the Goer ') ; but she becomes the kosmic, pure (hence
virghi), bright Moon of eternal law and order; who, like the
Orion-sun, hunts through the halls of heaven, and bears her
crescent-bow and arrows of light. And for the word /xts at the
end of a moon-name, we have an exact parallel in the Sk. frequent
moon-name Ghandra-mas (' Glittering- moon '). If ar^a here has
merely an intensitive force, then Arta-mis as a moon-name,
exactly corresponds with Arta-syras (= Surya), as a sun-name.

7^ HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [n

the fort of liis opponents. Ikit at times he tries liis
hand as a master-builder, and e.g., in the case of ' the
Myth of Fire-stcalincr,' purports to supply us with
a vahiable method by which to crack that often
extremely hard nut, the Hyponoia of mythology.
Says he : —

' The world-wide myth explaining how man first
became possessed of hre— namely, by stealing it-
might well serve as a touchstone of the philological
and anthropological methods ' {M. M p. 193).

Very well, so be it. He then collates various
interesting myths of fire-stealing, including of
course the Prometheus-story ; and complains that
Pj-of. Miiller does not attempt to explain w^hy
' Prometheus stole fire.' Lastly, he deals with this
difficult problem : —

' The myth arose from the nature of savage ideas,
not from unconscious puns.' ' Suppose that an early
savage loses his seed of fire. His nearest neighbours,
far enough off, may be hostile. If he wants fire,'
as they will not give it, he must steal it, just as
he must steal a wife ' (//;. p. 197).

' 0 hard condition ! ' well may we here exclaim.
As the unfortunate man is thus compelled to steal
fire, so, when he sits down and amuses himself with
inventing tales, his heroes must act as he does. And
Mr. Lang illustrates his view by a very singular
instance of survival : —

' If a foreign power wants what answers among us
to the exclusive possession of fire, or wants the secret
of its rival's new explosive, it has to steal it'
(//>. p. 198).

Il] MR. LANg's latest ATTACK 73

Prometheus up to date! Aud I did not even
know this. What a thing it is to be behind the
scenes.

XXIII. Application of this Method to the Myth of the
Birth of Athena

'Bravo!' cried I, on reading the foregoing
explanation, ' this is better than totem bears and
mice.' Here we are indeed ' on terra-cotta,' as the
old lady said when she landed at Dover. And, as
there is a certain mythic connexion between
Prometheus and Athena, I passed on to the latter,
and hastened to try Mr. Lang's patent method upon
her, beginning with the quaint myth of her birth.
We know how the philological adherents of the
Natural Phenomena Theory explain this. Hephaistos
(= Sk. Yavishtha, Lat. Juvenis, the ever-young
Fire- power, as the Morning-sun) strikes with his axe
the forehead of Zeus (=Sk. Dyaus, the Bright-sky),
and up starts Athena (= Sk. Ahana, the Dawn) in
strength, arousing the thousand sounds and voices of
the morning, Pallas (Brandishing the shafts of light),
Promachos (First in the battle with Darkness), and
so on. T am free to confess, as the expression is,
that I have always thought (and think) this an
admirable explanation of the tale, devoid alike of
brutality, folly, and arbitrary invention ; and one in
which the philology and the details of the myth
exhibit an excellent harmony. But let that pass.
I observe, after reading Mr. Lang's explanation of
the Fire-stealing myth, that, instead of all this,
I ought to look out for some savage tribe where they
have a pleasant custom of assisting a man in bringing
forth a daughter by splitting open his head with an

74 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

axe. And I grieve to say that in spite of the careful at-
tention I have bestowed u^oon the works of McLennan,
Robertson Smitli, Mannhardt, Dr. Tylor, Mr. Lang
and others, I have not yet happened upon these
people. That there must be some such folk I feel
sure is as certain as the fall of the image of ' Diana of
the Ephesians ' ; and I am as honestly anxious to
encounter them as ever was Mrs. Jiniwin to behold the
body of Mr. Quilp. I can, however, at present only
say, as Mr. Brass observed on that memorable
occasion, ' We have nothing for it but resignation ;
nothing but resignation, and expectation.^

XXIV. The Sin of the god Zu

Pondering upon my disappointment, I felt a doubt
invade my soul whether after all Mr. Lang's explan-
ation of the Fire- stealing myth would hold water.
He certainly quotes Homer on the matter, who
says : —

' As when a man hath hidden away a brand in the
black embers at an upland farm, one that hath no
neighbours nigh, and so saveth the seed of fire, that
lie may not have to seek a light otherwhere, even
so' etc. {Od. V. 488-93, ap. Butcher and Lang).
But this good man was clearly under no necessity to
steal. From what man could the first mortal kindler
of fire have stolen it ? Why must the savage always
steal fire ? Does the modern savage always steal
fire ? Was there more steaUng in archaic than there
is in modern days? As all savages have fire, must
there not liave been great numbers of original
archaic fire-kindlers who had no one to steal from ?
May there not be some other ])ossible explanation of

Il] MR. LANG's latest ATTACK 75

the Fire-stealing myth, and one, moreover, inde-
pendent of practical petty larceny ?

In pursuance of this train of thought, I commend
to the reader's attention an archaic Euphratean story
touchino; the sfod Zu. It has been translated and
commented upon by Prof. Sayce ( Chaldean Account
of Genesis^ 2nd edit. 1880, Cap. vii ; Rel. And,
Bahs.^ 1887, p. 293 et -ser/.), a ' scholar,' mark ye, no
'mere unscholarly anthropologist' (Vide J/.J/. p. 76).
The tale is as follows : —

To the Sumero-Akkadians 'the divine Storm-bird'
was known as Lugal-tudda ('the Lusty-king'), and
this concept, typified by a large bird of prey, was
called by the Semitic Babylonians Zu, a word which
in their language meant both a ' stormy wind ' and
a kind of vulture. Into the mind of Zu entered
ambition, the desire to obtain awful knowledge, and
to be as the chief of the gods. According to
Tablet K. No. 3454 :—

' The Tablets of Destiny, himself, Zu, he dreams of ;
He dreams that he is the Father of the gods, the protector

of heaven and earth.
The desire to be Bilu (=Bel) is taken in his heart.
" Let me seize the Tablets of Destiny of the gods,
And the laws of all the gods let me establish ;
Let my throne be set up, let me seize the oracles ;
Let me urge on the whole of all of them, even the spirits
of heaven." '

An opportunity occurring,

' The Tablets of Destiny he seized with his hand ;
The attributes of Bilu he took.
(Then) Zu fled away and sought his mountains.
He raised a tempest, making (a storm).'

The gods hold a council, and Anu (=A^aruna-

76 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

Ouranos) asks various gods to slay Zu. They
decline, but : —

' Into the Likeness of a bird was he transformed.
Into the likeness of the divine Storm-bird was he transformed,'

and banished from high heaven for ever. Prof.
Sayce, after having observed that ' the conception of
the tempest as a bird which rushes on its prey is
common to many mythologies,' continues : —

*Lugal-tudda brought the lightning, the fire of
heaven, from the gods to men, giving them at once
the knowledge of fire and the power of reading the
iuture in the flashes of the storm [' To be a weather
prophet was to be a prophet,' C, p. 76]. Like
Prometheus, therefore, he was an outcast from the
gods. He had stolen their treasures and secret
wisdom, and had communicated them to mankind.
In Babylonia, as in Greece, the divine benefactor
of primitive humanity was doomed to suffer. The
knowledge and the artificial warmth man has gained
are not the free gifts of the gods ; they have been
wrenched from them by guile ; and though man has
been allowed to retain them, his divine friend and
benefactor is condemned to punishment.'

' The storm-bird, who invested himself by stealth
with the attributes of Mul-lil [' Lord-of-the-Ghost-
world,' from m?//, ' lord,' + ///, ' ghost,' whence Heb.
Lileth, a might-demon, cf. Is. xxxiv. 14. ]\Iul-lil=
the Semitic Bel.], and carried the knowledge of
futurity to mankind, served to unite the two species
of augury which read the future in the flight of birds
and the flash of the liohtninn:.'

In considering this storv we cannot but be

Il] MR. LANg's latest ATTACK ']']

reminded how our own Sacred Books (and sacred
they are to me, however men may differ in their
interpretation) connect the first catastrophe which
they record with a theft of knowledge, perpetrated
at the instigation of a wicked Being exiled as a rule
from high heaven, although at times apparently
permitted to present himself there.

The legend of Zu points not so much to petty
larceny, as to the idea of larceny on a grand scale as
the origin of the Fire-stealing myth ; and the form
of the outcast god, fallen indeed, but still formidable
in his exile and despan% is not altogether an unsuit-
able analogue to the Greek Fire-stealer. We can
at least behold in him some faint reflection of the
sombre grandeur in which the genius of Aischylos
has wrapped the suffering Prometheus.

XXV. "What has Mr. Lang gained?
We are now in a position to ask, What has
Mr. Lang gained by his latest ' desultory and
wandering' {M. M. p. 200) attack upon Prof. Max
Midler ? Has he overthrown the Professor's philology ?
He does not pretend even to touch it? Has he
destroyed the Natural Phenomena Theory or (so-
called) Solar Mythology? On the contrary, again
and again he admits that in countless instances it
is, or may be, true ; though he denies its application
in many other cases. Has he shown that tlie
differences of opinion amongst the adherents of
Comparative Mythology are fatal to it? Only by
advancing arguments which, if valid, would wreck
almost every branch of knowledge ; and by suppressing
or ignoring the mass of instances in which philological
Comparative Mythologists are agreed. Many fields

78 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ll

of Comparative Mythology, e.g.^ Babylonia and
Arabia, he has not even mentioned. Has he success-
fully explained a single difficult myth ? Not one.
The stories of Demeter-Erinnys, Kallisto, Artemis
Brauronis, Prometheus are beyond him. Can he
show the origin of Totemism, or preserve his totem
flock even from the ravao'es of Mr. Frazer's Corn-
spirit? He cannot. Pig, bull, bear, mouse, all desert
him ; and, despite a desperate effort on the part of
Mr. Farnell, Hellenic, if not Aryan, totemism like
an insubstantial pageant faded, leaves not a wrack
behind. He has much to say on ' the Question of
Allies'; and as, of course, some mythologists lean
more to philological, others to analogical, and others
to anthropological methods in their researches.
Many combine these lines, and in some instances are
allies, in others opponents. But, after all, valid
argument is better than the authority of any name
however weighty ; and both Prof Milller and
Mr. Lang can claim powerful adherents. Mr. Lang
' smiles ' when Signor Canizzaro declares, ' Lang has
laid down his arms before his adversaries ' ; althouo-h,
as he had for ten years ' left mythology alone '
(Ji. M, p. xxi), the error was perhajDs pardonable.
And, although I tremble when I hear from Prof
Morselli that ' Lang gives no quarter to his
adversaries,' I also smile when this same sage adds
that they ' have long been reduced to silence.'

I have not, I find, noticed a lengthy story of an
Eel and a Cocoanut, to which both Prof. Midler and
Mr. Lang have done almost more than justice. But
nothing much turns on it, the question being mainly
one touching certain real or alleged mutual misunder-
standings of each other's meaning. I therefore say

ii] MR. Lang's latest attack 79

with Pausanias, ' Let these things be as they have
been from the beginning/ An eel is but a slippery
customer at best.

And now I conclude, with Mr. Lang, ' Here ends
this " Gentle and Joyous Passage of Arms." ' As he
thus compares his effort to the tournament at Ashby,
Prof. Miiller to ' the Templar,' and himself by
implication, to Ivanhoe, who upset Sir Brian, I trust
I may be allowed to observe, in the same spirit of
humihty, that I felt bound to take up my axe on
behalf of the distressed damsel Comparative Myth-
ology, whom this 'gigantic Front-de-Boeuf ' (his
name declares his totemism) asserts is ' tottering,'
and to do justice upon Sir Reginald. This done, it
only remains for me to leave him ' at the Sign of the
Ship/ a not unsuitable house of call for one who is
frequently at sea.

PART III

THE ABYO-SEMITIG SCHOOL OF HELLENIC
MYTHOLOGISTS

I. Retrospect

In the last century, which is practically removed
from us by hundreds of years, it was very generally
supposed that Hebrew was the primeval language ;
and that the gods and stories of mythology were
either derived from the circumstances recorded in the
Old Testament, or else were events of general history
clothed by time in fables, more or less obscure and
distorted. The great scholars of the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries, distinguished by their immense
erudition and untiring industry, have been of inestim-
able service in handing down to us the Classical
materials for research. As far as their lidits
permitted, they, as of course, did more than justice
to Semitic influence in regions Hellenic ; and, after
all necessary abatements, such names as e.g., that of
Bochart, will ever be held in honour. But they were
succeeded by an inferior race, marked by an ever
narrowing view, a portentous bigotry, and a philology
which, lasting in many instances well into the present
century, expired at length in a mere nightmare of
absurdities. Says Prof. Skeat : —

' I have had so much to unlearn, during the
endeavour to teach myself, owing to the extreme
folly and badness of much of the English etymo-

82 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

logical literature current in my earlier days, that the
avoidance of errors [by him] has been impossible ; '
and he alludes to ' the playful days of Webster's
Dictionary . . . when the derivation of native
English words from Ethiopic and Coptic was a
common thing' {Principles of Eng, Etymol. 2nd
series, p. ix).

During the last 150 years England has also pro-
duced a curious race of ' Cranks/ by no means yet
extinct, who have brought forth various extra-
ordinary works purporting to explain all the history,
mystery and belief of the past on philological and
general lines purely imaginary. Some of these pro-
ductions in their day took an honoured place in
almost every library ; and, from their appearance in
booksellers' catalogues, would seem still to command
high prices, a touching illustration of the vahie which
mankind almost always puts upon certain peculiar
kinds of folly. I do not name any of them, as they
are quite unworthy even of such publicity as may be
afforded by the pillory.

The follies of Mr. Casaubon and his brethren
produced in the earlier part of this century a great
reaction, in which Germany took the lead. The old-
fashioned notions were contemptuously abolished
almost en bloc. The motto of this new school was
'Greece for the Greeks.' Numerous ancient errors
perished for ever, but, unfortunately, with them a
certain proportion of truth was also thrown over-
board. Semitic influence in Greece was scouted as
an absurdity ; and perhaps the high water mark in
this reaction was reached when ' Kadmos ' Avas
declared to be a pure Hellenic name. That time has
gone by ; and now the schoolboy can read in his

Ill] THE ARYO -SEMITIC SCHOOL 83

Liddell and Scott: 'KaSyc^o?. The man from the
East ; of. Hebr. Kedem! Such is

' Action and reaction
The miserable see-saw of our child-world.'

But the German CLassical school were, despite their
errors, immeasurably superior to the folly which they
overthrew ; and such names as e.//., Otfried Miiller,
will ever remain examples of a superb Classical
scholarship, which erred in many details only because
it was necessarily ignorant of a mass of knowledge,
much of which is a commonplace even to the
smatterer of to- day.

Upon this great scientific advance there followed,
its cause being mainly due in the first instance to
the British power in India, the gradual rise of a
scientific comparative philology, bringing in its train
the great truth of the original unity of the Aryan or
Indo-European nations, and necessarily producing a
study of comparative mythology, which in its logical
development, is, as of course, not merely Aryan, but
also Semitic, Turanian, and world-wide. The life of
Prof. Max Miiller, the leading exponent in England
of this mighty movement, almost covers its present
historical extent. Upon its discoveries and its merits
I need not dwell. In this work I am concerned in
the endeavour to show that the Aryanists, like the
Classical phalanx of Otfried Miiller, carried away by
the splendour of their achievements, have pushed
their claims too far, and have not conceded sufficient
place to that great historical infiuence, which, as the
years roll, it becomes ever clearer and clearer that
the Semitic East exercised upon archaic Hellas.
' The gods will give us some faults to make us men.'
The Churches 'of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch

6 *

84 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

have erred ' ; and shall the Assemblies of Mythologists
altogether escape a smiilar fate ?

Contemporaneous with this last-named movement
came that astonishing advance in our knowledge of
the ancient and archaic non-Classical world, which
we denote by such terms as Egyptology and Assyrio-
logy, the latter expression very incorrect indeed,
but perhaps too well established in use and general
understanding to be altered now. The buried past
has risen majestic from the grave of ages, and her
train of shadowy kings, — scoffed at by many a great
Classical scholar such as Cornewall Lewis, — confronts
us as living realities, and even in some instances,
like that of a Ramesses the Great, actually face
to face. Champollion, Lepsius, Birch, Mariette,
Maspero, Eenouf, Grotefend, Rawlinson, George
Smith, what a debt we owe to them, and to their
worthy followers and successors in these supremely
interesting and important studies.

Lastly, Anthropology has taken the field^ repre-
sented by many an acute and industrious student
and compiler. All honour to them, and success to
their efforts ! Li dealing with the past, skilled
assistance from every quarter is most valuable ;
particularly as the problems to be attacked are almost
invariably complex in character, being frequently
partly explicable on one line of research and partly
on another.

II. Certain difficulties of the Student in England

In England the student of the higher and obscurer

branches of knowledge, unless he chance to be

altogether exceptionally favoured by circumstance

and environment, will probably find his lot rather a

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 85

hard one. He must not expect any of tliat Govern-
ment support which France and Germany so carefully
and so admirably extend to rising talent. He must
renounce all that popularity and the substantial
rewards which are bestowed upon the abler of those
artists whose themes are morbid piety, prudery, petti-
coats, or popular demonology. ISTor must he expect
much sympathy from his more fortunate brethren,
until indeed he has become an important personage.
Reviewers and critics, should they condescend to
notice him, will probably treat him with but scant
courtesy, especially if he chance not to reside in
London, Oxford, or Cambridge. And if any well-
disposed Mcodemus ventures faintly to ask for a
patient hearing for the unfortunate wight, he will be
contemptuously told that no profit of any kind arises
out of Galilee. I am aware that the reviewer has
been much found fault with of late (Yide sup. p. o2);
and we must ever remember that his task is often a
very hard one, and that the constant and necessary
assumption of a diluted omniscience, whilst all the
time he may be but too conscious of a very real and
genuine ignorance, will frequently reveal a weary
face when the mask is withdraAvn. The student,
moreover, may often find that unless by some means
he can gain the goodwill of certain circles, coteries or
cliques, let him write as he may, he will, to a
considerable extent, be left out in the cold. I have
known several painful instances where men of great
powers and great knowledge have dropped sadly and
prematurely into the grave, crushed by a grinding
poverty and an unjust neglect. But it is not in the
nature of the Englishman to yield in such a struggle.
And just as our colossal and so deeply envied Empire

86 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

has been almost entirely built up by the unaided, and
even often deeply thwarted, efforts of private
individuals, so in the grand fields of research the
high-hearted student, even if this great authority be
ignorant of him and that important centre acknow-
ledge him not, w^ill yet work on, whilst health and
strength permit, content to try to do his duty,
however unnoticed and obscure. And I can, from
my own experience, assure him of this, that such
studies, pursued for their own sake, grow sweeter
even as they grow more arduous ; and that I for one
am deeply grateful to Greeks, Etruscans, Babylonians
and others, for the delightful problems which they
have bequeathed to us.

III. General Standpoint of the Aryo-Semitic School

The Aryo-Semitic school of Hellenic mythologists,
whilst fully recognizing the immense services
rendered to the cause of knowledge by the old
Classical scholars and the Aryanists, and also
duly acknowledging the valuable assistance of
anthropological research, endeavours, as the special
feature of its method, to give the fullest effect to the
ever-increasing mass of light which has been thrown
by modern discovery uj^on the archaic history of
Egypt and Western Asia in their relation to Hellas.
They recognize that for hundreds of years before the
commencement of the Olympiads, the Greeks were
in close contact with the mixed peoples of Asia
Minor, Aryan, and non- Aryan, with the Phoenicians ;
and, to some extent, even with the Egyptians, who,
as early as the Sixth Dynasty, called the
Mediterranean ' the Great Circle of the Uinivu,' Sem.

Ill] THE AEYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 87

Yivanas {i.e., Javanians) =rr lonians. The Aryo-
Semitic school gives, which others do not, their
leo-itimate weio-ht to these historical facts. Painting
and sculpture, architecture, astronomy, and arithmetic
(Vide Strabo, XVI. ii. 24), the arts of commerce and
navigation, weights and measures, the treasures of the
forge and the loom, for such gifts as these, and for
many other features of civilization the Greek, as we
know, was indebted to the non- Aryan East. That
when he received them, he breathed upon them the
splendour and the energy of his own genius is
nothing to the present purpose. We know likewise
that in the w^ell-known historical period the Greek,
like the Roman after him, was ever most willing to
receive the foreign divinity and to adopt the foreign
ritual. Adonis was the darling of the Athenian
matrons of the time of the Peloponnesian war ;
Alexander accepted Melqarth and Amen, Yahveh and
Bel, as fast as he met with their ritual and their
votaries {YidieRog^Yih, Alexander of Macedon,]). 209) ;
and, when Zeus-Jupiter had long been degraded to a
mere planetary genius, Isis, Serapis and Mithras
swayed the conservative religionists of the Roman
Empire. Apart from evidence, therefore, is it not
probable that the archaic Greek, a semi-barbarian
with an immense capacity for borrowing, would take
somewhat of the religion and ritual of those to whom
he ovN-ed so much in other ways, and who, from
the point of knowledge and civilization, were so
greatly his superiors? It would, moreover, be all
the easier for him to do this as, to a very great extent,
he could do it almost unconsciously. And the cause
of this lies in the fact that the Greek was ever prone
to find his own divinities in the gods of the nations

88 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

whom lie met. Again and again he speaks of Zens
and Hera, Athena and Artemis, when in reality
he refers to Semitic divinities entirely distinct.
H^rodotos goes to Egypt, and finds there almost
all his Greek gods in full force ; just as men since
have talked about Juno at Carthage (Vide sup. p. 47).
And this constant habit of tJie Greek mind, utterly
misunderstood, has caused immense confusion in the
views and writings of mythologists. Taking such
statements as true, verhaiim et literatim., they have
indulged in a vast amount of absolute nonsense.
And, although now every scholar understands how
these presentments of fact by Herodotos and others
are to be received, yet, even at the present day, such
a giant in scholarship as Prof. Max Milller apparently
believes that e.g.^ the goddess Athena Onka of
Thebes is indeed a variant of his own beloved
Ahana.

Next, what is the philological aspect of the
question ? We do not compare the names of Roman
and Peruvian divinities because there is neither
a linguistic nor an historical connexion between
the two nations. And if we find similar customs
among them, e.^., each buried their erring vestal
virgins alive, we see that such usages spring from
causes which operate upon the general mind of
mankind, and are independent of any special
circumstances. We compare the divinities of Yedic
India and of Greece, because there was once an
historical connexion between the ancestors of Indians
and Greeks; and because investigation shows that
their languages are in reality but variant dialects
of a common original. Now suppose that these
two nations had spoken languages philologically

Ill] THE ABYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 89

unconnected, but had long dwelt side by side; and
that India had bestowed upon Greece nearly all the
rudiments of civilization, including, as of course,
various words and names, it would have been
quite legitimate to investigate whether some Yedic
divinities might not, under these circumstances,
have found an entrance into the Hellenic Pantheon.
To give an instance of such a borrowing, and I take
it from Prof. Miiller, although elsewhere he implies
that there are no such cases. Chaitan (= Arabic
Shaitan, Heb. Satan) appears in the Mordvinian
Pantheon (Yide C, p. 250), and Christus in the
Wotjakian {Ih. pp. 465, 468). Thus, there may be,
and often has been, a borrowing of divinities between
nations who dwelt side by side, although their
languages have belonged to different families of
speech. Such a connexion may be called historical,
as opposed to linguistic. Who doubts the equation
— Persian Khshayarsha = Gk. Xerxes? But its
truth does not depend upon the fact that Iranian and
Greek are two dialects of an original common speech.
Its basis is purely historical, viz., that at a certain
time the Greeks came in contact with a certain
King of Persia, and did their best (such as it was)
to reproduce his name in a Greek form. As all
scholars admit that the Sk. Dyaus = Gk. Zeus, so
are they equally clear that the Ph. Melqarth (' City-
King ')=Gk. Melikert^s (Vide C p. 219) ; and this
latter equation may stand as the corresponding illus-
trative example in the Aryo- Semitic school. As the
one equation logically involves much besides itself
(Yide sup. p. 19), so also does the other. And
from the foregoing considerations it will at once
be evident that we violate no philological principle

90 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

when, with due care, we endeavour to explain certain
Greek names from Semitic sources.

IV. Semitic Indications in Greek Mythology

A.s the Greeks were an Aryan nation, the prior
probabihty is that a Greek divinity is an Aryan
divinity (Vide sup. p. 20). What, then, are the
indications of Semitic influence in particular
instances? The principal signs which point to the
Semitic origin of any particular personage of Hellenic
mythology are, (1) When neither his name, nor the
chief mythic incidents connected with his legend
appear in the other branches of Aryan religious-
mythology ; (2) When Aryan nature-myths do not
supply an easy and appropriate explanation of his
concept and history ; (3) AVhen his cult is found in
regions either absolutely non- Aryan, or else permeated
with non- Aryan influence; (4) When his form is
more or less unanthropomorphic ; (5) When his
character and story generally are in harmony with
those of mythic personages admittedly non-Aryan ;
and (6) When the resources of Aryan philology are
powerless or inadequate to explain his name, and
some or many of his principal epithets.

It is to be remembered that the true and original
concept of a divinity is best arrived at by the correct
interpretation of his name, titles, and epithets; and
that almost every real explanation of the Hyponoia of
mythology is simple, and by its obvious suitability
to the case, justifies itself to an intelligent and
unprejudiced mind. Explanation of mythic incident,
or any etymon of a divinity-name whicli is utterly

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 9 1

strained and harsh, stands self-condemned. And the
same is equally true of an attempted rendering of
a cuneiform tablet or of an Etruscan inscription.
When Dr. Deecke gave an utterly unnatural, forced,
quaint, and in itself improbable rendering of the
Etruscan inscription on the leaden plate of Maghano,
his effort stood self-condemned. It hardly required
to be refuted by a jesting translation of the same
inscription by Prof Pauli, which logically and
linguistically was in every way as good or better
than the serious attempt ; or the severe remark of
Prof. Breal, ' II y a quelque chose de plus extra-
ordinaire encore que cette traduction : c'est la
maniere dont elle est justifiee.'

V. * The Question of Allies '
Whilst I am alone responsible for many of the
applications to detail mentioned in this work, of the
general principles of the Aryo- Semitic school, on a
' question of Allies,' as Mr. Lang puts it, we may
claim the countenance and support of many great
names in the recent past and present. An illustrious
adherent was the lamented Francois Lenormant,
whose death at the age of 47, was for the time an
almost irreparable loss. It is impossible that the
torch of knowledge should, at all events at first, burn
with the same brightness in the hand of a disciple
who may have caught it as it fell from the dying
grasp of the master, as it did when firmly held on
high by the latter. Many precious things are sacri-
ficed at the funeral pyre of the illustrious dead. But
alike in his Assyriological studies, and in such works
as Les Premieres Civilisations (1874), Les Origines
de UUistoire (1880-82), and the Essai sur la Fro-

92 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

pagation de rAlpliahet Pliemcien, the master has left
us a legacy of the highest value. Another example
of sympathetic treatment is furnished by Maury in
his well-known Ilistoire des Felif/ions de la Grece
Antique. A crowd of scholars are rallymg round
the Aryo- Semitic banner, amongst whom I may
mention such men as Prof. Max Duncker, author of
the History of Greece; Canon Isaac Taylor, the well-
known historian of the Alphabet ; and two other
savants whose services to knowledge cannot easily be
over valued, Prof. Sayce and Prof. Fritz Hommel.
One of our latest and most powerful recruits is
M. Victor Berard, author of the De VOrigine des
Cultes Arcadiens (1894). This accomplished writer,
who combines an actual and practical knowledge of
the locality of which he treats (always a great
advantage), with keen acumen and an acquaintance
with the latest authorities, bids fair, when his work is
carefully weighed and its conclusions duly appreciated,
to effect a revolution in many of the current ideas
respecting a considerable portion of Greek mythology
and legendary history. The vast erudition of Dr. Otto
Gruppe, to whose special views on the origin of
mythology I do not here refer, is also quite on our
side.

There is another name which I can mention here
with every respect and with a special pleasure, that
of Sir Geo. AV. Cox. It will ever remain his special
achievement, by working on the analogical principle,
to have crystalized into a harmonious Avhole the
general application of the Natural Phenomena Theory
to the details of Aryan mythology. The conclusions
he has formulated have often been sneered at, seldom
or never dealt with ' at grips,' as Mr. Lang would

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 93

say. In former works I have liaci at times to criticise
his views, and to complain that his attitude respecting
Semitic influence in Hellas was too much that of
Prof Max Miiller. Mr. Lang commences his Intro-
duction to M, M. by observing that ' it may well be
doubted whether works of controversy serve any
useful purpose.' Therefore, being before all things
logical, he naturally proceeds to write a ^ work of
controversy ' ; and quotes a saying from Matthew
Arnold, foolish, because untrue, that ' on an opponent
one never does make any impression.' Apropos of
this baseless dogma, let me quote the following
passage from the Preface to the second edition of
Sir Geo. Cox's Mythology of the Aryan Nations
(1881) :—

' During the twelve years which have passed since
the publication of the first edition a large amount of
solid work has been done within the domain of
Comparative Mythology. Of the results so gained
probably the most important is the clearer light
thrown on the influence of Semitic theology on the
theology and religion of the Greeks. This momentous
question I have striven to treat impartially ; and for
my treatment of it I have to acknowledge my obliga-
tions to Mr. Eobert Brown's valuable researches in
the field of the great Dionysiak Myth.'

I quote the above passage, not at all in my own
honour, but simply in that of Sir Geo. Cox. Had he
modified his views under the influence of a great man,
like Prof. Max Miiller, or of a prominent and fashion-
able man like Mr. Andrew Lang, we might not
perhaps have been surprised. But that he, as a fact,
did modify his conclusions on the matter, and thereby

94 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

became, and is, in touch and harmony with the
Aryo- Semitic school, simply from a careful con-
sideration of the arguments urged by so humble a
student as myself, shows an honesty of purpose and
a devotion to truth of a very high order. Plum^an
nature is better than Matthew Arnold deemed it.

VI. An instance of the results of the Historical Method

Although our school is specially historical, and we
often discover the true meaning of legendary narrative
rather in the disputes and contests between hostile
tribes and religionists on earth, than in ideas drawn
from the successions and discords of the forces of
nature, yet it must always be remembered that, as
e.g.^ Prof. Miiller has most fully shown, the Xatural
Phenomena Theory is not merely of Aryan, but of
world-wide application. A dawn-myth may be
Phoenician, as well as Yedic (Cf. Gruppe, Der
phoinikische Urtext der Kassiepeialegeiide^ 1888). But
there is one recent instance in which the successful
application of the historical method, has so signally
put to flight a whole mass of supposed impalpable
myth, idle legend and mere invention, an instance so
important and so far reaching in its logical conse-
quences, that I cannot leave it here unmentioned.
I refer to the complete and most remarkable demon-
stration of the historical accuracy of the writer of
the xivth chapter of the Book of Genesis, Times
innumerable have the campaign of Kudur-Lagamar
(Chedorlaomer) in the AVest, his overthrow by
Abraham, and the story of Melchizedek been treated
as an Oriental romance, incredible, impossible, as
baseless as the tale of Judith and Holofernes. Or,
again, it has been explained as an elaborate piece of

in] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 95

astronomical symbolism, veiling high and wondrous
truths. But, thanks to such quiet^ patient workers
as my friend Mr. T. G. Pinches of the British Museum,
to the labours of Prof. Sayce, and above all, in this
instance, to the brilliant results achieved by Prof.
Hommel (^Tlie Ancient Hehreiv Tradition as illustrated
hj the Monuments^ Eng. Edit. 1897), the secrets of
history, faithfully preserved by the imperishable
cuneiform tablets, stand revealed. Now there pass
before us the great form of the Elamite conqueror ;
the mighty Khammurabi-Amraphel, true founder of
the grandeur of Babylon ; the majestic figure of the
Priest-king of Uru-salim (' the-City-of-Peace ') ; and,
lastly, as a necessary corollary, we see in Abraham
no eponymous tribal hero, no imaginary personifica-
tion of the Nocturnal-heaven, but a noble form of
flesh and blood consisting, a mighty Shaykh, the
terror of the oppressor and the marauder, and the
follower, and therefore the friend, of the eternal
God.

I do not hesitate to sav that the result of the
splendid discoveries which have now been made by
such men as Hommel, Glaser, Sayce and others, not
merely reveals to us the amazingly important part
played by archaic Arabia in the history and develop-
ment of religion, and throws a flood of light upon
many a dark and difficult passage in the Old Testa-
ment. It does all this indeed, but far more also. It
shakes to the foundation the whole vast recent theory
and system of the comparatively late origin and
composition of the earlier books of the Bible ; that
huge house of cards reared mainly by Wellhausen
with infinite skill and pains, and which, really based
chiefly upon nescience and what was for the time

96 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

being apparent probability, and so eagerly daubed
by disciples in Germany and in England with much
untempered mortar, now totters to its fall. And
these results affect not merely our views about the
HexateucJi. The whole critical system of the school
of Wellhausen stands discredited. Men may attempt
to show that such and such a Psalm was written in
honour of one of the Ptolemies ; or, if they like, that
the Song of Songs was specially composed for Antony
and Kleopatra. But the heart has gone out of the
business. Khammurabi has dealt the system of
Wellhausen its death blow.

VII. The Contests of the Gods and Heroes
The contests of the gods and heroes related in
myth and archaic legend are based, wholly or mainly,
upon one or more of the three following circum-
stances:— (1) The apparent succession and conflict
of the ordinary phenomena of nature ; (2) The
actual contests and oppositions of the rival votaries of
clashing faiths and cults ; and (3) The fancies of
archaic poets and mythographers, these being not
wholly arbitrary, but shaped and moulded more or
less in accordance with an almost infinite number of
pre-existing facts, myths, and floating beliefs.

The Natural Phenomena Theory has made us
familiar with an immense number of instances in
Aryan mythology of contests based upon the first of
these three causes. ]>ut it applies in almost equal
force elsewhere. Witness in Egypt the contests
between Asar (Osiris, probably derived from the
Akkadian Marcluk-Asari), Ra, and Har (Horus) on
the one side ; and Set and the monster Tebha
(Typhon) on the other. Or witness the Euphratean

Ill] THE ARYO -SEMITIC SCHOOL

story of a contest between the Sun-god and the Moon-
god (often the Diad of hostile brethren), which
centuries after amongst the Persians, took an Euhemer-
istic character as the rivalry between two opposing
satraps Nannaros (Ak. Nannar, a name of the Moon-
god) and Parsondes (Vide Sayce, Rel. And. Bahs.
p. 1 57 et seq.). The Iliad furnishes us with the most
famous instances of contests of divinities arisino: from
the third of these causes.

But it is with the second of these three underlying
sets of circumstances, that the Aryo-Semitic student
of Greek mythology is specially concerned. No view
of natural phenomena will adequately explain them.
No mere poetic fancy called them into being. To
take an instance. A well-known, but reverently-
regarded, legend told how Herakles held a mysterious
contest with Apollon for the possession of the Delphic
Tripod ; and how the strife between these two mighty
personages Avas only terminated by the direct inter-
vention of Zeus, who severed them by a flash of
lightning (For a good Yase-illustration of this scene,
vide Walters, Cat. of the Gk. and Et. Vases in the
Brit. Mus. Vol. ii (1893), p. 22. As H^rakl^s is
moving off with the Tripod, Apollon following, seizes
one of its legs ; Artemis stands behind him, Athena
behind Herakles). Here the Natural Phenomena
Theory is powerless to aid us. We can understand
indeed by its assistance how the solar hero Herakles
can borrow the golden boat-cup of Helios, to enable
him to sail over the western ocean. For here Helios
stands confessed as the Sun, pure and simple ; and
the mythic phrases which tell of the solar hero and
the solar barque blend harmoniously. But a personal
strife of a great (Aryan) Sun-god against a great

98 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

(Aryan) Sun-god, and especially against so truly
national and revered a figure as Apollon, who, with
Athena, perhaps best represents the splendour of
Hellas at the brief moment of her culmination, is
almost inconceivable. No poet or mythographer
would ever have dared to excogitate such an idea.
Like Herodotos, they were all far too god-fearincj.
We know, moreover, from various sources and indica-
tions that Delphoi was a great centre of rival, and, at
times, contending, cults ; and this circumstance it is,
which constitutes the true Hyponoia of the legend.
Mr. Farnell, with whom I am often happy to find
myself in agreement, well remarks : —

' No doubt there were physical reasons why Helios
and why Poseidon should l)e worshipped at Corinth;
but the Corinthian legend of this strife, the Delphic
legend of the contest . . of Apollo and Heracles for
the tripod, the Attic legend of the rivalry of Poseidon
and Athena, and many other similar theomachies,
probably all contain the same kernel of historical
fact, an actual conflict of worships — an earlier
cherished by the aboriginal men of the locality, and a
later introduced by the new settlers' {Cults, i. 270).

VIII. Herakles

Herakles is not found in the mythology of the
other branches of the Aryan nations, and his name,
for all its intensely Greek appearance, the Aryanistic
philologist is unable to explain (Vide (7. pp. 612,632).
I am not concerned here to deny that there may
perhaps have been a native Hellenic god so called ;
but it is quite certain that, if such there were, he
disappears, like a double star, in the overlapping

Til] THE AUYO -SEMITIC SCHOOL 99

splendour of liis great brother, the Semitic toilmg,
warring, voyaging, travelling, man-slaying, at times
maniacal. Sun-god ; whose end is naturally, as Prof.
Midler expresses it, ' the sun's death in the fiery
clouds.' Prof. Midler excellently illustrates, on the
lines of the Natural Phenomena Theory, many
incidents in the Herakles-myth ; but all such illus-
trations are quite as applicable to a Semitic, as to an
Aryan, Sun-god. And, as will be seen (Vide inf.
p. 194) it is just in connexion with some of these
exploits of Herakles upon which the Aryan myth-
ologist has little or nothing to say, that the Semitic
connexion of the hero throws the clearest and most
remarkable light. I am quite aware of the ordinary
view, one, e.cj.^ usually found in English Diction-
aries of Mythology, that the doings of a Semitic
Sun-god of the Outer-world were, in com[)aratively
late times, arbitrarily tacked on to a native Plellenic
Sun-god of the Inner-world. But this theory
altogether collapses under careful examination con-
ducted by the light of modern discoveries. Herakles,
the dweller at Thebes and at Tiryns ; the opponent
of such purely Aryan divinities as Plera, Aides
(\^ide inf. p. 190), Apollon, and Ares; the Lion-
slayer (Vide R. B. Jr., Eridamis, Appendix iii. The
Sun-god and the Lion), first worshipped in Greece at
the Phoenician Marath (Marathon ; cf. Pans. I.
xxxii. 4) ; linked by a thousand ties and incidents
with Western Asia, and especially v/ith Phoenicia
and her colonies, is in all probability Phoenician in
name as in nature — Harekhal (' the Traveller.' Vide
17 f, p. 195 ; Berard, Cultes Arcad. p. 257). As Prof.
Duncker well sums up the matter : —

' Marathon bears the same name as Marathus

7 '"'

lOO ITELLEXIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

(Amrit) in Crete, and on the Phoenician coast near
Aradus; a fountain springing at Marathon is called
Macaria, "in honour of Heracles"; i.e.^ it bears the
name of Melkarth, which the Greeks modified into
Melicertes and Makar; the district of Marathon
worshipped Heracles ; indeed, it boasted that it had
been the first of all the Hellenic countries to worship
him. Heracles is Archal, the labouring, striving,
fighting Baal Melkarth of the Phoenicians ' {Hist, of
Greece, i. 62-3).

And, here, let me remark in passing, that we often
meet with much really baseless assertion respecting
the alleged comparatively modern date of this or that
Greek myth ; the reason given generally being that
it is not mentioned by earlier writers. As, however,
some three-fourths of early Greek literature has
perished, such reasons and opinions are generally
of very slender value. Moreover, as a rule, the
argument from silence must be regarded with very
grave suspicion. The altogether undue weight too
frequently attributed to it, has again and again led
writers into opinions really untenable, and often
actually ridiculous.

IX. Athena v. Poseidon
Few stories are more familiar than that of the
great Attic contest between Athena and Poseidon for
supremacy at Athenai, a city the plural form of
whose name probably indicates, according to the
acute suggestion of Prof. Sayce, that, like various
other Greek towns, it was originally the scene of
a combination of distinct tribes or nationalities, each
dwelling in its own quarter ; as is the case at present
in various Oriental cities. We know how in the

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL lOI

merit-competition Athena produced the olive and
Poseidon the war-horse, the Ak. ansu-kurra ('animal
from the East '), between which, also appearing as
the Sea-horse, and the god there is ever the closest
connexion ; and from which he is styled Hipparchos,
Hippegetes, Hippios, Hippodromios, Hippomedon, etc.
This is no contest between the Dawn and the Sea,
and no mere idle invention. It is a true, though
veiled, relation of a time when the destiny of Athens
trembled in the balance, a remote epoch when King
Porphyrion ('the Purple-man,' /.g., the Phoenician)
reigned there and worshipped his Aphrodite Ourania
(Yide Paus. I. xiv. 7), who as Mr. P^arnell, amongst
others, has shown with great learning and ability (Vide
Cults ^ ii. 658 et seq)^ in origin was no goddess of high
and holy passion as opposed to Aphrodite Pandemos,
but simply the Oriental love-goddess 'Aschtharth
(Astarte). Ourania is but the translation of her title
Melekhet-Haschamaim (' Queen -of- heaven '). Had
Poseidon, the representative of the Phoenician
element, prevailed ; had Athens become another
Carthage, the destinies of the w-orld might indeed
have flowed in a different channel. But the same
genius which rolled back the tide of barbarism at
Marathon and Salamis, equally prevailed on this
momentous occasion ; and Erichthonios (' the Man-
of- the- earth ') also an epithet of Poseidon himself
(Yide Hesych. in voc. Erechtheus)^ and with good
reason, — the child of Ge, connected with the Serpent,
which to the Hellenes is a symbol of the earth,
Erichthonios, otherwise Erechtheus, representative
of the native Attic race, stretched forth his baby
arms to the divine Athena -Ahana, who took him
once and for ever to her breast. The peculiar epithet

102 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Kynades (^ Dog-faced, '= dveXevOepo^;, ' treacherous ' —
of animals) applied to Poseidon by the Athenians,
appears to have some connexion with this great
event. The scene is well represented on a Cornetan
vase (Figured in Eoscher, Lex. p. 1305). Ge, a
female figure, partly concealed by the ground, holds
up the little naked Erichthonios, who stretches out
his arms to Athenaia ; whilst the goddess, stooping
slightly, with sweet and gracious dignit}^, holds out
her hands to receive him. Behind her, staff in hand,
stands the naked figure of Hephaistos, representative
of the craftsman's art in that aspect in which it is
associated with masculine toil and effort, and who,
combined with Athena, completes the art-circle.
Behind Ge is Poseidon (on whom the boy turns his
back) in true Dagonic form, a demi-man of noble
aspect, but from the waist downwards a sea-monster
in huge spiral curls.

The female ' reflection ' of this Sea-god is the
Sea-goddess Avhom we meet in many places. Thus,
she appears on Babylonian seals ; or, again, as
Atar-'Ati (Atargatis-Derketo) of Ashqelon. Pau-
sanias (VIII. xli. 4) encountered her near Phigaleia,
represented as a statue, woman to the waist and fish
below. The antiquaries of the place called her
Eurynome (Vide inf. p. 117), whilst people generally
regarded her as Artemis. Pausanias very justly
observes, that he cannot understand Avhat possible
connexion can exist between Artemis and a figure of
this kind. She was also called Artemis Limnatis
(Paus. IV. iv. 2) or Limnaia {Tb. II. vii. G), Hlie
Lady of the Lake.' Liician, or whoever else may
have written the monograph On tlie Sjirlan Goddess^
met with her in Phoenicia. He says, ' I saw a statue

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL IO3

of Derketo in Phoenicia, and a strange sight it is, half
woman, wliile the half from thigh to toe extends as
the tail of a fish' (Sec. xiv). Troizen, in ArgoUs,
affords another excellent instance of the wide-spread
and prolonged contest between Athena and Poseidon,
which here ended in a drawn battle followed by
peace. Says Pausanias (II. xxx. G) : —

' The Troizenians reverence their country, if any
people do. And they say that Oros [=Tzur-os,
i.e., Tyre. Cf. ' Zcopo^, quern conditorem Carthaginis
facit Appian ' Gesen. Script. Ling. Ph. p. 415. So
the Babylonian god-name Uras reappears in ' the
Assyrian king' Horus of Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxx. 51 ;
vide Sayce, Rel Anct. Bobs. p. 152] lived first in their
land,' which was called Oraia after him. This state-
ment naturally rather perplexed good Pausanias, who
remarks that Oros seems to him to be an Egyptian,
not a Hellenic, name. He continues the mythic
pedigree :—Leis (=Sem. Laish), daughter of Oros
(Cf. Judges, xviii. 7, where Laish, as a locality, is a
daughter of Phoenicia), became by Poseidon the
mother of Althepos (' the Healer,'= Asklepios). This
genealogy affords an interesting instance of how
such pedigrees were at times composed. Here, the
invading city is personified as the first dweller in the
country. Next, a place-name connected with her
is married to one of her divinities, the offspring of
the union being another of her divinities. It is thus
that we must deal with much of the mythic history
and genealogies preserved by Pausanias. Ivightly
understood they contain a very valuable residuum of
archaic Hellenic records, such as we find scarcely
anywhere else. Mr. Gladstone once observed to me
that he valued Pausanias almost next after Homer ;

I04 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

and indeed it is difficult to overestimate tlie import-
ance of the Periegesis.

During the reign of Althepos, one of those disputes
between Hellene and Phoenician, so many of which
are recorded by Pausanias, arose. The mj^thic form
is carefully preserved, so we read : — ' They say that
Athena and Poseidon had a wrangle about the
country, and determined to hold it in common, for
thus Zeus ordered them to do. And on this account
they [the Troizenians] reverence Athena naming her
Poiias [' City-goddess,' a title the female equivalent
of Melqarth.] and Sthenias [' the Strong '] ; and
Poseidon they name ''the King,'" Z.^., Melekh (Cf. the
Ammonite gods Molekh and Milkom, 1 Kings^ xi. 5, 7 ;
Zeus Meilichios, understood euphemistically as ' the
Kindly '). Thus, the mixed po23ulation of Troizen^
after the Phoenician fashion, resolved Poseidon and
Athena into a divine Diad, Melekh and Melekhet-
qartha (=Gk. Astyanassa), the 'King' and the
' Queen-of-the-city.' 'And thus their ancient coins
bear as a device a Trident and a head of Athena.'
This last statement is perfectly correct, except that
Athena is put first. Vide Percy Gardner, Brit.
Mils. Cat Gh Coins, Peloponnesus (1887), p. 165 :
' Troezen. Before B.C. 431 ; Ob. Female head, facing,
with long hair (Athene). Rev. Trident.' The
testimony of coins is frequently of immense value to
the mythologist.

Lastly, the poet takes up the story, and recounts
in deathless verse the long struggle between Uncle
and Niece over the person and fortunes of a
protagonistic Greek hero. Here, too, we see Athena
at the last victorious; but, at the same time,
Poseidon, although he may come off but second best

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL IO5

in the contest, is honoured and reverenced even
when seemingly defeated. We know this poem as
the Odijsmf. And those who wish to apprehend the
true signiticance of the position of the Homeric
Poseidon, compelled to bow to the will of Zeus in
the Inner World, but almost supreme in the Outer
World, cannot do better than avail themselves of the
subtle insight and almost matchless knowledge of
Homeric detail, and of its force and meaning, which
we fnid in the analysis of the god by Mr. Gladstone.

X. A Digression

As a modern youth, who, just entering into society
and the grand possibilities of public life, is fortunate
enough to secure for friend and patroness some
clever, powerful, influential, keen, yet tender-hearted,
woman of the world, of noble rank, a dozen years or
so older than himself, and who may perchance have
known and loved his mother, — such somewhat, if
I may illustrate great things by small, was the
position of the Athenian of the grand epoch which
ended about B.C. 440. How well has many a man
of the Victorian age progressed by the aid of such
a firm, wise guidance ; benefitted by an CKquisite
tact, which has preserved him from follies, regulated
and directed his just ambitions, showed him how
to correct and conquer his deficiencies, how to make
his strong points still stronger, and to do full justice
to himself. She has led the coy goddess Opportunity
to his side, and made her kiss him. She has, it may
be, almost imperceptibly guided him to the choice
of a partner sweet and suitable ; and when, it may

I06 IIELLE^^IC BIYTIIOLOGY [iTI

be on his marriage morning, as he stoops before her,
and she, as she imprints a kiss upon his brow,
whispers, ' God bless you, my Child, your dear
mother would indeed be proud if she could see
you now,' with what feelings does an ardent, true
and generous-hearted youth regard such a patroness?
Although she be neither mother, sister, sweetheart,
wife, does he not look upon her with a combined love
and reverence so deep that he cannot fathom it, so
tender and so sacred that it blends with the holiness
of devotion. It is often asked. How did the
Greeks reo^ard their o;ods? I answer that a true-
hearted Athenian of the great period looked thus
upon Athena, save only that her superhuman power
and splendour vastly intensified his awe and his belief.
And how was it that this noble and stimulating
concept of divinity faded so early from the spirit
of the City of the Violet Crown? Mainly, because
it was materialized. After the mighty effort of
the Persian War wealth and power fast flowed in
upon the votaries of Athena. As art advanced with
an astonishing rapidity, the earlier representations of
the goddess were felt to be not merely insufficient
but ridiculous ; just as the archaic shrine, desj)ite
the hoary reverence which hung about it, became in
measure contemptible. An Iktinos arose to build
her a house, a Pheidias to crystalize into tangibility
with matchless skill her ideal beauty, and her unseen
yet finely apprehended strength. And then, 0 sad
result of human powers at their highest, 0 cruel
instance of the trail of blight which human genius is
wont to cast behind it, Athena enshrined in un-
exampled splendour, vanished from the mind of
her Athenians, as the Dawn pales in sunrise, save

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 107

that Pallas passed once and for ever. The City,
Athens, Akropolis, ParthciioD, the Statues, they
became the goddess. Athena fell from heaven to
earth, never to rise again. And when the sway of
Perikles, so brilliant yet so baneful, was over, he
could leave no successor; and, at his melancholy
close, had to hand on to frantic demagogues,
incapable dullards, and reckless aristocrats, devoid
even of the last rags of principle and of decency,
the city which he had glorified and the power which
he had centered in his single grasp. How such
successors m the course of a few years destroyed
the Athenian Empire, is one of the chief marvels
and pities of all time. And by the stern fate dealt
out to such a worthy, pious soul as Nikias, we learn
the truth that when the good man, through weakness
and despicable fear of his fellovfs, betrays those
principles of conduct and of action which his heaven-
P'uided soul warns him are true and noble, he must,
in just requital, drink the cup of punishment to the
last drop. The Eepublic rose, indeed, from her fall,
but with her once strong right arm withered, and her
head grey, as by the transit of long centuries of
weary effort. Her art had culminated, and therefore
now could be but imitative and decadent. Poetry
lay buried in the grave of Sophokles. Her truest
sage and teacher she had persecuted and slain. Yet
one thing remained to her — the tongue. And in the
persons of Platon and Demosthenes she bestowed
upon the world two such talkers as it had never
seen. The first of these, however little able either to
influence the times he lived in or his successors, was
yet honoured m his life and happy in his death,
passing from the stage whilst still the home of

I08 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Athena and Erechtheus preserved its freedom.
The second, less fortunate, lived to share in the rout
from that fiatal spot which the Greek of to-day calls
Cheronea, and to suck the poison of the reed in the
sanctuary of Poseidon. The great talkers were, as
of course, followed by smaller talkers, and they in
turn by less; until we reach the epoch of the dwarfs
of babble and gossip. One historian flashes a ray
of brilliant light upon these pigmies. They had
encountered a little man, but a great gentleman,
*a god-born soul true to its origin.' They had
exclaimed, ' What does this Gutter-snipe (a-TrepfxoXoyo^)
want to say ? ' and half in idle curiosity, half in mere
jest, they hurried him along to the Hill of Impre-
cations, and, probably placing him on the white stone
of Impudence (Vide Pans. I. xxviii. 5), — for this
would be part of the joke, — made a ring round him,
and listened to an address which, from the fragment
of it that has come down to us, must have been one
of the finest and most skilful commendations of a
cause wdiich ever fell on ear. It had but small
effect, and, as the years rolled on, the idle tongues
still wagged, the philosophy got ever drier and more
pithless, until its last professors fled from the rigour
of Justinian, true type of cold-hearted persecuting
bigotry, to seek for freedom at the hands of the
barbarous despotism of Persia. Centuries passed ;
the city of Kimon and Themistokles was enslaved
and trampled upon, but the temple of Iktinos,
unharmed by the gentle hand of pitying Time,
still reared its matchless symmetry. It remained
for the madness of Venetian and Turk, late in
modern times, to shatter the sanctuary of the Virgin
into utter ruin, and to leave it as it meets the eye

nr] THE ARYO-SEMTTIC SCHOOL IO9

to-day. Our own century has brought fresh chances.
Greece has been in part delivered from the iron
tliraldom of the changeless barbarian of Central
Asia. But she has done little for herself except
talk. The melancholy events of the present raise
' for Greeks a blush, for Greece a tear.' If a Greek
cannot hght bravely in the neighbourhood of
Thermopylai, he must indeed be a poor creature.
The Concert of Europe, whatever else it may have
failed in, has at least prevented the step of the Turk
from being again placed on the hill of the Akropolis ;
but, excepting Jerusalem, mother of sorrows, and
matchless in her degradation, few, if any, of earth's
famous cities have endured a humiliation so long
and dreary, as has befallen the nobly-placed dwelling
of Erechtheus, whence the light, touching the spear
of the colossal Athena, was wont to flash towards
Sunium in the brief summer of the Hellenic world.

' Bear with me ;
My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,
And I ranst pause till it come back to me.'

XI. Prof. Mliller and M. B^rard

Having now, to some extent, set forth the
principles of the Aryo-Semitic school, and illustrated
them by a few examples, I will next consider in
detail Prof. Miiller's treatment of some of the
principal figures in the Hellenic Pantheon for which
we claim a Semitic origin. I first notice a reference
which he makes to the work of M. Berard (Vide
sup, p. 92). He remarks that certain scholars, who
entertain grave doubts respecting the identity of various

no HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Greek and Vedic divinity-names, ' are satisfied with
the vaguest similarities when they compare Semitic
and Aryan names, wit lie at even attempting any tiling
like a scientific etymological analysis' ((7. p. 216).
It will be observed that he speaks as if Greek were a
lansruaij^e connected with the Semitic dialects, and as
if the Semitist was bound to show a ^ root '-connexion
between this or that Greek and Semitic word or name.
He does not, of course, mean this. Where connexion
exists, it is one based on borrowing and trans-
literation, not on variant phases of an original unity.
And our view of this connexion will depend in each
case upon the degree of similarity, coupled with the
history and general concept of the mythic personage.
Nothing more, from the nature of the case, can be
asked of us.

Miscalling the French writer ' Barard,' Prof. Miiller
devotes a single page to the 388 pages of his clo^ly-
reasoned and very learned treatise.' He mentions
certain suggested Greek and Semitic equations, but
only to dismiss them with the remark : —

' It is impossible to refute such assertions, because
there is really no evidence to lay hold of and to
examine.'

One of these suggestions is that the forms
Erigone, Erykine, etc., arc at times, transliterations
of the Semitic Erek-haijhn (not of a form ' Erek
Hagim,' as Prof. Miiller puts it), a title of Astarte
translated by Lomjae vitae auctor. In support of this
view, M. Berard advances a whole body of evidence,
with which it is clearly flir too troublesome for
Prof. Miiller to deal in detail. He contents

ITT

] THE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL III

liimself with merely asserting that ' there is really no
evidence to examine,' and passes on. Now it is,
of course, higlily natural that Prof. Miiller, after a
half a century of effort in a certain field, crowned
with brilliant success, should be utterly disinclined
to examine carefully a rival theory resting upon
numerous points of detail, and involving a delicate
weia'hino; of evidence. But such an attitude does
not dispose of the opposing evidence, which
remains as weighty as before. After this, one is
almost surprised that he admits the equation
Melqfa*th = Melikertes. But Prof. Miiller certainly
takes just exception to a suggestion of M. Berard,
which, however, is apparently made half jestingly,
' Presque tout I'Olympe grec est peut-etre d'origine
semitique ' (p. 864). If this be really meant
seriously, I am as much opposed to it as Prof. Miiller
himself (Vide suj). p. 20).

XII. Prof. Miiller on the Kabeiroi

I venture to assert, without any fear of con-
tradiction from scholars generally, that the equation
Sem. Kabirim (^ Great-ones') ^Gk. Kabeiroi, is as
firmly established as the equation Dyaus = Zeus.
This fact Prof. Miiller does not venture to deny
either directly, or indirectly by suggesting an Aryan
etymon, but says : —

' The origin of the Kabeiroi seems to me so
mysterious and uncertain that I can derive no help
from them in deciphering the adventures of the
Dioskouroi.' As the latter are Aryan personages

112 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

entirely distinct from the Kabirim, no such help
could ever be reasonably expected. He con-
tinues : —

' Their name [Kabeiroi] has been derived [He
means that attempts have been made to derive their
name] from every possible and impossible language.
. . I shall not add a new etymology, nor any
hypothesis about their origin' {C. p. 639). We may
feel quite certain that if he could have ventured to
claim them as Aryan gods, he would have done
so. He does not venture upon this, and so remains
mute about them ; and I cannot but regard the
instance as showing very forcibly how utterly
disinclined he is to admit even the most familiar
cases of Semitic influence in Hellas, if, in any way,
it is possible to avoid expressly making the
admission. The Kabeiric cult was naturally in full
force in Boiotia, where the Epigonoi are stated to
have put a stop to it for a time. The Kabeiroi w^ere
said to have taken signal vengeance on Persian
and Macedonian profaners of their shrine (Pans. IX.
XXV. 6, 7).

XIII. Kronos

Kronos, like Poseidon, Dionysos, Aphrodite and
Herakles, does not appear in any form or phase
either in the Vedic Hymns, or in the religion and
mvthology of any Aryan nation except the Greeks.
Readers of Prof. Mliller and Mr. Lang are aware
what a puzzle this strange figure is to them.
Mr. Lang, who calls him ' Cronos,' a form neither

Ill] THE AKYO-SEMTTIC SCHOOL II3

Greek nor Latin, gets quite crusty over him,
styles him ' an odious ruffian,' and declares, with
some triumph : —

' Now, I have offered no explanation at all of who
Cronos was, what he was god of, from what race
he was borrowed, from what language his name
was derived. The fact is that I do not know '
{M. M. p. 36).

We quite believe him ; but the air with which
he makes his declaration of nescience, irresistibly
reminds one of a remark in Miss Edgeworth's Franh^
' If you are thankful for your ignorance, you have
doubtless a great deal to be thankful for.'

The first point for consideration in any investi-
gation about such a personage as Kronos, is,
Where do we primarily chiefly meet with him ?
The answer is, In the works of a Boiotian poet,
Hesiod, whose family had settled in Aiolis. The
whole archaic history of Boiotia shows it to have
been a special centre of Semitic influence. Even
Prof Miiller observes : —

' It has been a very generally received opinion
that in the names of Kadmos as well as of some
of his descendants we have indications of Phenician
immiir ration, and that his name and that of his
grandson Melikertes suffice to prove this. This
may be so ' (C p. 647).

As in the case of the Kabeiroi, he declines to admit
what almost every other school regards as nearly
a truism. But when we turn to the Semitic
side, to the Phoenician kosmogony and to the

I 14 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

mythologico- religions fragments of early Phoenician
belief which have been preserved by Phil on of
Byblos under the name of the writings of
Sanchouniathun, we meet with Kronos again, and
acting in his usual apparently extraordinary manner.
If anyone should suggest that these fragments are
comparatively modern forgeries, I answer that the
labours of Movers, Bunsen, Lenormant, and others
have proved such an opinion to be not only
untenable, but ridiculous. Whether there ever was
an actual Phoenician sage called Sanchouniathon, or
whether, as the witty American said of Homer, ' his
works were written by another fellow of the same
name,' is altogether immaterial. A Greek philosopher
of the age of Philon could no more have forged these
fragments than Damaskios, the last of the Neo-
Platonists, could have concocted the archaic
Euphratean kosmogony which he has so well
preserved, or than an Assyriologist of to-day could
have invented the correspondence contained in the
Tablets of Tel-el-Amarna.

As Prof. Miiller and Mr. Lang have showed at
length, the myths of various races speak of the
primeval embrace of Heaven and Earth. They lay
together in the darkness, and their severance, when
it came, must have been effected by light. Kronos,
therefore, at this stage of the story, is necessarily
a Light-power. As anthropomorphic analogies are
rigidly maintained, this severance is accompanied by
a mutilation which is a logical sequence of the
anthropomorphic mould in which the story is cast.

Here is the point in the tale at which to enquire
into the etymon of the name ' Kronos.' Prof. Tiele, a
most weighty authority, observes : —

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL II5

' Mr. Lang has justly rejected the opinion of
Welcker and ^Ir. Max Miiller, that Cronos is
simply formed from Zeus's epithet, Kpoviwv ' (Ap.
M. M, p. 31).

Prof. Midler says : —

' Kpovo^, mail [Italics mine.], whatever may be said
to the contrary, stand dialectically for XP^^^^: time'
(C. p. 507).

This is merely a child of despair. If Prof. Midler
were arguing against this view, with what force and
copiousness of illustration would he insist that a
name of this abstract meaning never was and never
could be bestowed upon a primitive Aryan divinity;
that these gods always embody some physical idea,
such as the bright sky, dawn, sun opening the
gate of the morning, etc. Twenty years ago, in
The Great Dionysiak Mijtli^ as Mr. Lang notes
(J/. M, p. 85), I explained Kronos as-i=Karnos
('Horned'). Let us examine this view. An
objection subsequently made by Mr. Lang that
Kronos is not represented as wearing horns, is
natural enough ; but, as we shall see, really not
to the point. The Assyrio- Babylonian word qarnu.,
' horn,' reappears in Hebrew and Phoenician as qeren.
In Semitic usage, ' horn ' (as e.g.^ often appears in the
Old Testament) is nsed as the equivalent of ' power,'
the ' Horned-one ' = the ' Powerful-one.' Thus, we
read in Sanchouniathon (i. 7) that 'Aschtharth
(= Astarte), the Bab. Ishtar or Istar, ' She-Baal the
Cow ' (LXX in Tobit, i. 5) ' put a bull's head upon
her head, as the mark of her sovereignty.' She is
the Axiokerse of the Samothracian mysteries, as

8^^

Tl6 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [

iir

Dionysos is the Axiokersos (Yicle inf. p. 143) and
we meet her elsewhere as Ashtoreth Qarnaim
(' Astarte-of- the- Two-horns,' Gen. xiv. 5). Smiilarly,
Philon, who of course regarded Kronos as an Hellenic
divinity, which indeed he became, always renders
the name of the Semitic god II or El (' the Power-
ful ') by ' Kronos,' in which usage we have a lingering
feelino- of the real meanino: of the name. Now from
Q-e-R-e-N naturally arises such a form as K-e-E-e-
N-os, Karnos. But, in such cases the Greek was
ofcen wont to drop the first vowel. Thus, the Sem.
Kar-kdm=Gk. Kp6-/co^. Karnos, therefore, naturally,
reappears as ' Kronos ' (' the Powerful '). Qarnaim.,
as the name of a horned divinity, reappears in the
name and cult of the rayed (= horned) Sun-god
ApoUon Karnaios, so ancient and famous amongst
the Dorians; and which, as Otfried Mtiller has
showed, ' was derived from Thebes ' {Doric Eace,
i. 373). One idle story said that this worship was
established by an imaginary Karnos, an Akarna-
nian. Another told that ApoUon w^as called Karnaios
from some connexion with his cornel trees (/cpavela^;)
which had been profanely cut down; and that the
Greeks, having propitiated him, called him Karnaios,
' transposing the pco according to ancient custom '
(Pans. III. xiii. 3). This j^assage clearly shows that
there was an ancient transposition of the p of some
kind or another. And the Semitic connexion of
Karnaios well appears in the statement of Praxilla,
quoted by Pausanius, that he was the son of Europe
(ze., Erehh, 'the West,' as the side of sunset and
darkness, whence is derived the Gk."Epe/3o<;, primarily
' the Gloom-after-sunset '), the sister of Kadmos.
Kronos, of whom Karnaios is a variant, also re-

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL I 17

appears as the radiant and glorious Sun-god in the
fixmiliar and beautiful passage in Pindar ( Olymp. ii)
Avhere is described the happiness of those blessed
heroes who ' accomplish their way on the path of
Zeus to the tower [J.e.^ secure-abode, like irapaSetao^,
from Old Pers. pairidaeza^ = peri-dyke.] of Kronos.'
There Kronos, assisted in his sway by Rhadara-
anthys (= Eg. Rhot-amenti, ' King-of-the-AVest ' ;
or Under- world), has the highest throne; there, too,
dwell Peleus (According to M. Berard, = ttt/Xo?,
Lat. lutum = Sem. tliitli^ Thetis) and Kadmos.

But, perhaps the reader may say, yes, yes, all very
well^ ' almost thou persuadest me.' Yet, surely, was
not Kronos a Darkness-power? Did he not swallow^
nearly everybody he could lay hands on? not in
cannibal fashion, as some wiseacres have suggested,
for he brought them all up again none the worse ; but
like the Egyptian ' Crocodile of the West which fed
upon the setting stars' (Renouf. Rel. Anct, Egypt^
p. 108), or the monster down in the sea, which, having
swallowed the sun, ' spat out its prey again on the
shore ' (Goldziher, MijthoL amomj the Ilehs. p. 101)
next morning. Does not Homer tell us that Zeus
has imprisoned Kronos and the Titans beneath earth
and sea? Yea, verily, but have patience. Let us
hasten slowly.

In the Phoenician kosmogony preserved by
Pherekydes of Syros, the instructor of Pythagoras,
and a few fragments of which have come down to us,
it is stated that at hrst the world was ruled by
Ophion, Tepcov 'O^lwv (= Sem. NcWidsh qadmun)^ and
Eurynome {= Sem. Erehhno emd^ ' Beautiful-night.'
The independent Gk. name Eurynome is here applied
by way of transliteration), v/ho were hurled from

Il8 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

heaven and power by Kronos (II) and Ebea (Amma).
Ill Homer Eurj-nome (== Artemis Limnatis, etc.
Vide sup, p. 102) has become a daughter of Ocean
(//. xviii. 399). As Ophion and his consort were
deposed from power, so in turn was the Phoenician
Kronos by the Aryan Zeus. Mr. Farnell well
describes Kronos as ' one of the figures of a lost and
defeated religion' (Cults^ i. 25). But Homer, the
purely Aryan Hellene, who sang of the glory of
Hellas and her gods, took one view of his ultimate
fate, whilst Pindar, the Boiotian, impregnated with
the Phoenician traditions of his country, took another.
Kronos thus degraded, a nocturnal Sun-god now
permanently confined to the Under- world, became a
figure of gloom and darkness, and is made to act like
the other Powers of the depthj the Gapers, Swallowers,
Hob -goblins of blackness and the Beneath. Lastly,
Kronos, as a god to whom human victims were offered
by Phoenician and Carthaginian down to a very late
period, became also from this circumstance still more
regarded as a Zeus Laphystios, a 'Glutton-god,' de-
vourer of his offspring. The reader must bear in
mind that I am not here writing a treatise upon
Kronos, or on any of the mythic personages I may
mention; but merely giving in briefest outline the
standpoint from which their legends are regarded by
the Aryo-Semitic school. I have devoted two good-
sized volumes to Dionysos, and still there is a vast
amount to say about him; but, owing to the con-
stantly increasing mass of material supplied by new
discoveries, which ever necessitates correction and
adjustment of views and suggestions, I have never
yet been able to bring out the intended third and con-
cluding volume of the work. Art is too long and life

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL II9

too brief for one man even to treat of the twelve chief
Hellenic divinities with anything like an exhaustive
completeness. He might almost as well attempt to
write the history of England on the scale of fullness
and thoroughness of a Freeman or a Gardiner. But,
I claim that the above view of the Kronos-myth, is the
only one which suggests any adequate interpretation
of its very singular and apparently absolutely conflict-
ing details. And that the suggested etymon of his
name is simple, natural^ not strained, and supported
alike by mythic incident and by linguistic example.
This cannot be said in favour of the conflicting
guesses of the Aryanists. Chronos (' Time ') indeed
plays many singular tricks; but not such as are
ascribed to Kronos, son of Ouranos and sire of Zeus.
(For further notice of Kronos and the connected
horned divinities, vide R. B. Jr., The Great Dionysiak
Mi/fh, II. Cap. IX. Sec. iii. TmiroJceros). At Olympia,
that great centre of divinities, still stands the Hill of
Kronos, though every temple is levelled to the ground ;
and the ancient archives of the men of El is stated
that Kronos was first king in heaven, and had a
temple built to him at Olympia by the men of the
Golden Age (Pans. V. vii. 4).

XIV. Poseidon

Prof. Milller, after remarking that one of the most
prominent features of the Yedic Surya (the Sun) and
Agni (Lat. Ignis), Fire, ' as dwelling in the sun,
consists in their triple character,' as representing the
rise, culmination, and setting of the sun; and that in the
Atharva-veda we meet with ' three welkins,' ' three
heavens,' three birth places of Agni' {ie.^ heaven,
earth, and clouds), etc., continues : —

I20 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

' We find a similar division in Greece where the
whole world is divided into three realms, the hio-hest
sky belonging to Zens, the sea to Poseidon, and the
lower world to Hades, these three sons of Kronos
being originally personifications of the same Zens '
( C. p. 657).

This passage affords an interesting example of the
lengths to which the undue extension of a sound
general theory can carry even the ablest men.
Observe, first, that confusing together of things
entirely distinct, which Bacon says is the mother of
error. The triple character of Surya and Agni, as
above mentioned, has nothing whatever to do, and
offers no parallel, with the Homeric statement of
Poseidon (which I shall carefully consider) respecting
the division of spheres of sway between the three
Kronid brothers. As well might we say that the
Vedic concept received illustration by the partition
of empire between Octavius, Antony, and Lepidus.
The extraordinary statement that ' these three sons
of Kronos' were originally but Zens-Dyaus, Prof.
Midler supports by reminding us that llaides (poet.
Aides, Aidoneus, Lat. Hades) was called Zeus
Katachthonios (Zeus ' of-the-Under-world '),and that
Poseidon was styled Zenoposeidon. Just so; and I
may add that Aischylos calls him OaXacTaiov Ma
(' Zeus-of-the-sea '). And what, pray, is the force of
such expressions? When the historian styles Wel-
lington 'alike the Fabius and the Marcellus of the war,'
does he mean that the Duke was a variant phase of
those commanders? Or when the Japanese are
referred to as ' the English of the Pacific,' are we to
understand that in realit}' the two nations are but

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 121

one? We find therefore no 'similar division in
Greece.' ' Ikit,' says Prof. Miiller, in Greece ' the
whole world is divided into three realms,' of which
Zeus, Poseidon and Haides each take one. What a
strange inaccuracy is here also ! A division of ' the
whole world ' is just what we do not find in Greece.
Let us turn to the Homeric statement itself, and
observe that this declaration is put into the mouth
of Poseidon (not of Zeus or of Haides), who is made
to say thus : —

' Three brethren are we . . Zeus, and myself, and
Hades is the third, the ruler of the folk in the under-
world. And in three lots are all things divided, and
each drew a domain of his own, and to me fell the
hoary sea, . . and Hades drew the murky darkness,
and Zeus the wide heaven, in clear air and clouds,
hut the earth and high Olympus are yet common to all
{11. XV. 187-93, ap. Lang). Thus ' the whole world '
(= the All) was not divided between the three
brothers.

Now we meet with this singular division of the
All in no other Aryan mythology, and indeed in only
one other mythology. We find it exactly in the
archaic scheme of the Euphrates Yalley. There Anu,
Ak. Ana, takes the heaven, Bel the under-world and
the darkness, and Ea (= Dagon-Poseidon) the deep.
The earth was unappropriated and was common to
all, and so was the Mountain of the World, on the
summit of which the gods resided, and which
Lenormant justly styles ' the Olympus of the
Akkadians.' Here, then, is the origin of the
arrangement to which aj^propriately Poseidon has
been made to appeal. He admits that Zeus, whose

122 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

worship "had been established in Greece long prior to
his own, was ' the elder-born,' but charges him with
undue interference, and says, ^ Quietly let him abide
in his third portion.'

The Aithiopians, ix,^ the ' Sun-burnt ' inhabitants
of the Phoenician littoral and of Libya (Cf. Herod, iv.
188), most distant of men from the standpoint of
the Homeric poet, and separated by the empire of
Egypt, into which Poseidon could not gain admission
(Vide lUd. ii. 50), into two parts, one lying tow^ards
sunrise, the other towards sunset, are his special
votaries. The god's contests with Athena have been
noticed {^Sup. p. 100) ; but they merely afford an
instance amongst many such. Thus he contended
unsuccessfully with Hera for her favourite Argos;
successfully with Zeus himself for the island of
Aigina ; unsuccessfully with Dionysos for Naxos.
At Delphoi and Korinth he submitted to arbitration,
receiving the promontory of Taineron in Lakonike
for his Delphic rights or claims ; and at Korinth
being assigned the Isthmus, whilst Helios received
the Akrokorinthos. To the Greeks he was especially
a Sea-god, inasmuch as he had come to them across
the sea ; but that he was not a mere sea-god, such as
their own Aryan Nereus, is evident from a great
variety of circumstances, <?.//., from the fact that his
cult frequently obtained far inland. He is constantly
contrasted by Homer with the great group of Aryan
divinities, styled ' the gods who possess the wide
heaven.' Opposed to them he is the 'Earth-
possessing (Gaieochos) Poseidon;' they all pitied
Odysseus, he did not (Vide Od. i. 19, ^'^). For
further analysis of the Poseidonic myth 1 would

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL I23

refer the reader to my work Poseidon^ and to Mr.

Gladstone's varions and elaborate studies of the
Homeric divinities.

XV. The Name 'Poseidon'

Feeling Poseidon slipping from his grasp, Prof.
Midler makes one last desperate effort to retain his
hold upon the god by supplying him with an Aryan
name. This particular pathway is indeed marked
by the traces of many a philological ruin; but,
unless we are of those who deem that the commission
of errors in any branch of study is good reason for
abandoning it, we shall not merely be undiscouraged
in such an enquiry, but derive much instruction from
previous failures. The Professor, having noticed
that ' much has been said in praise of a new [Aryan]
etymology of Poseidon ' {C, p. 379) by Fick, proceeds
practically to reject it, and intimates that Brugmann
does the same. This cleared out of the way, we
come to the point ' at grips,' as Mr. Lang would say.
We are given an interesting list of dialectic variants
of the god's name (Vide C. pp. 368, 399). It is
found as the Aeol. Poseidan, the Ion. (tem. Herodotos)
Poseideun, the Arkad. Posoidan, the Lak. Pohoidan,
the Thessal. Poteidoun, the Attic Poseidon, the Epic
Poseidaon, the Boiot. Poteidaon, the Old Dor. Potidan,
Potidas, etc. All these variants cannot be of the
same age, and Prof. Muller insists : —

' That Poseidon is a later form of Potidan, not
vice versa^ cannot be doubted, as various inscriptions
confirm this name, as well as the geographical
name of Potidaia' ((7. p. 659).

124 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

How can any inscription prove that a variant
occurring in it is the earliest form? Obviously it can
only prove that such variant was in use at the time
the inscription was written. That Doric colonists
from the Isthmos who carried the cult of the god
with them to their new Macedonian home (Vide
Herod, viii. 129) on calling their foundation after him,
should have used a Doric form of his name, proves
nothing. What other kind of form Avould they have
been likely to use? ' Potidaea,' says Leake {Xumis.
Ilel. in voc.)^ ' the local form of Potidania or
Posidonia, the city of Neptune.' I may remark in
passing that Neptunus is entirely a distinct divinity
from Poseidon ; but, it was formerly customary to
call Greek divinities by Latin names, the original
reason of the practice being that in the Middle Ages
AYestern Europe did not understand Greek.
Similarly, when an Achaian colony, Sybaris, founded
a town and v^ished to name it after the god, they
called it, notPotidaia,but Poseidonia. So far, then, the
question which was the older form remains an open
one. Shall we take the Epic Poseidaun and regard
that as the original form? AVhy so? Prof. Miiller
is well aware, nay insists, that a shorter form may
be quite as old as a longer one, Deo as Demeter.
Erechtheus as Erichthonios (Vide C. p. 368). And,
again, are not words constantly altered syllabically
by the poets to suit their own convenience? The
Achaians and Athenians were chiefly lonians, and in
these variant forms we see mainly the Ionian o-
opposed to the Doric r, whilst the Attic Poseidon
is confirmed by the independent Aeol. Poseidan and
Arkad. Posoidan. The late Ion. Poseideon is merely
a least-effort variant of the Epic form. Now Poseidon

in] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 25

was a special divinity of the lonians, a sea-faring
race from a remote period ; and Ionian (Vide sup. p. 86)
to Egypt and to the Semitic East, meant ' Greek.'
It is, therefore^ most probable that in the three very
similar variants, Poseidan, Posoidan, and Poseidon is
contained the true and earliest Greek form of the
god's name.

But, as Prof. Milller's argument proceeds, we see,
why, without any sufficient cause, he insists that
Potidan must be the oldest form of the name. He
next asks : — ' Might not his name Potidas, Potidan,
Potidaon, be explained as a dialectic form of
Poti-fidaios, he who is near or against the wooded
land or against Ida? . . . We actually have
Poseidon's old name Potidaios [What proof is there
that this was his ' old name?'] preserved in the name
of the town of Potidaia ' ( C. p. 659). If Prof. Miiller
can « show the independent existence of the form
*Potidaios, we might admit that it reappears in
Potidaia. But, it seems, he cannot. As it happens,
we have quite a group of variants of the name
Poseidon, but, alas, Potidaios does not appear
amongst them ; and the reason for this must be that
there never was such a name. Potidaia, instead of
being founded on this phantom, will be, as Leake
thought it was, an abraded form for Potidanaia.
Such abbreviations are constantly met with. But,
with the disappearance of ^Potidaios vanishes like-
wise the extraordinary interpretation ' He-who-is-
near-or-against-the- Wooded-land ' (Ida). This is
explained by the suggestion that the Greeks always
regarded Poseidon (the sea) as at war with the land.
They could not have thought thus, because, as we
have seen, they knew that he shared the earth in

126 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

common with Zeus and Haicles. Nor are the shores
which to their knowledge he washed, by any means
particularly ' wooded.' If Poseidon is Enosichthon
( ' Shaker-of-the-land ' ), Dionysos is Elelichthon
('Earth-shaker'); and the epithet has no necessary
connection with the sea. "ISa means ' a wood/ "IS?7,
'• the Wooded ' hill ; it does not in Greek mean
^ wooded land.' But, yet, if anyone can accept this
remarkable etymon, one that, amongst other things,
leaves almost the entire history of the god unexplained
and unintelligible, — a circumstance which, on Prof.
Miiller's own principles, justly condemns it, — if any
can still receive this hardest of sayings, let him
receive it. For my own part, 1 cannot but regard it
as equally unsupported by the philological facts of
the case, and by the general character of the
Poseidonic mytli, as being forced and unnatural in
the highest degree, and therefore, as of course, quite
unreliable. It is a child of despair, the last arrow in
the Aryanistic quiver.

Let us next, in accordance with the entire bent
and indication of the Poseidonic myth, turn to a non-
Aryan-source ; and observe what explanation of this
mysterious name presents itself. We have seen the
Fish-god pass westwards from the Euphrates Valley
to the Phoenician sea-board. AYe have seen him at
Athens at the birth of Erichthonios, still preserving
his unanthropomorphic form. Let us next catch this
old man of the sea at Krete a half-way house between
Phelesheth (Philistia) and Attike. Says Lenor-
mant : —

' Le nom d'un dieu Tan se trouve en composition
dans celui d'ltanos de Crete, i-Tdn^ " Tile de Tan."

ni] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 12']

Les plus anciennes monnaies de cette ile representent
le dieu Tan comme un personnage a queue de poisson
tenant le trident de Xeptune [Exactly the same
figure appears on coins of Ashqelon, vide Babelon,
Monnaies des Perses Acheni. PI. viii. No. 3]; au
re vers est represente le monstre marin tannin et
sa femelle ' {Les Origlnes, i. 545, note 2).

The coinage of Ttanos, of the fifth and fourth
centuries e.g., shows this fish-tailed personage, who
has been erroneously supposed to reiDresent Glaukos,
' striking downwards with trident held in r. hand, and
holding in 1., fish.' The Rev. often shows ' two crested
sea-monsters {tannintm) facing one another ' (Wroth,
Brit, Mus. Cat, Gk. Coins of Crete, etc. p. 51). So
much for Itanos.

Turning to archaic Boiotia, a district which was
simply a mass of Phoenician influence, we find the
eponymous Boiotos described as the son of Itonos and
the mymph Melanippe (Paus. IX. i. 1) /.e., ' Black-
horse ' = the Black-horse Demeter-Erinnys (Yide
sup. p. 41). Now Poseidon is specially the 'Lord'
or ' Husband ' (Gk. Posis, Sk. Patis) alike of the Fish-
goddess (Derketo, etc.) and of the Black-horse-god-
dess. Thus Pindar {01 vi. 177-8), styles him USai^
'AfxcpLTpiras' Now compare the three forms Poseidan,
Posoidan, and Poseidon and I-tan-os, I-ton-os with
Posis prefixed ; and the result is Uoac^ "lTavo<; =
UoaocBdv, UocretSau, U6cn<;"lTO)Poq = UoaeLScov, i.e., 'Lord-

of-the-isle-of-Tan ' (Krete). Such, I beHeve, is the
true interpretation of this very mysterious name ;
and the reader will see how exactly it harmonizes
with all that I have said about the god, and that
neither philology nor meaning are in any way strained

128 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

or unnatural. Poseidon-Tan is thus Lord-of-tlie-
Sea-monsters {Tanninhn) such as are shown on
the Kretan coins; for 'many such pastureth the
renowned Amphitrite ' {Od. v. 422). T will conclude
with words of the divine Homer: —

' The mighty Earthshaker . . . forthwith went
down from the rugged hill, faring with swift steps,
and the high hills trembled, and the woodland
[Observe, the 'woodland' was not the only thing
Avhich trembled.] beneath the immortal footsteps ot
Poseidon as he moved [Mark, the god on land, not
the sea, makes earth tremble.]. Three strides he
made, and with the fourth he reached his goal even
Aigae [i.e., ' Goat-town,' |]a-Poseid6n, Elates (' the
Charioteer'), as the Athenians called him, being
specially connected with the Goat, and as UmiocJios-
Auriga, 'the starry Charioteer,' holding the Goat,
Aix-CapeUa, Kk. Aslcar, 'Goat,' on his arm.], and
there was his famous palace in the depths of the
mere. . . Thither went he, and let harness to the
car his horses swift of flight. . . and seized the
well-wrought lash of gold, and mounted his chariot,
and forth he drove across the waves. And the sea-
beasts (fannimm) frolicked beneath him, on all sides
out of the deeps, for well they knew their lord'
(//. xiii. 17-28, ap. Lang).

XVI. Aphrodite

The extreme Aryanistic position of Prof. ]\Iiiller
is well illustrated by his resolute refusal to surrender
Aphrodite, whose name he cannot explain, to the
Semitic group of divinities. His argument is :—

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 29

'Homer calls Aphrodite the Charis [Where? As
frequently, Prof. Milller gives no reference, and this
proposition is surely very dubious.], and as such the
wife of Hephaistos [Why must Charis be tlie wife of
Hephaistos? He suggests a natural phenomena
explanation, but doubts it ; observing, ' We must
not attempt to explain too much.']. It is enough
for us to know that Charis was Harit (morning
splendour), just as she was Argynnis, the Sk.
aryuni, the bright, a name of the Dawn in the
Veda'(C. p. 731).

I willingly admit the equations Charis = Harit,
Argynnis = Ar^uni ; but this gets us no further.
The syllogism is : — Charis was the wife of Hephaistos:
Aphrodite Avas the wife of Hephaistos : therefore
Charis = Aphrodite. This won't do. Mr. Gladstone
well observes of Aphrodite : —

' We now know that the planetary worship of the
Assyrians [and Babylonians, etc.] was brought by
the Phoenicians into Greece [Thus, as Istar-Astarte
was goddess of the ' Star of the morn and eve,' so
to the Greeks Hesper-Phospher became the Star of
Aphrodite.], and that each deity was associated
with a particular metal. We find in Cyprus, the
land of copper, with a Phoenician colony, the
Avorship of Aphrodite. We may safely then refer
the origin of this Olympian personage to the
Assyrian [Say ratlier ' Euphratean,' as a wider
term ] mythology. The local indications of her
worship, as proceeding from the [non-Aryan] East,
are in accordance with the traditions which under
the names of Astarte, Ashtoreth, Mylitta, exhibit
to us a similar character as held in honour there.

130 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

The marriage with Hephaistos bears a similar
witness; the more remarkable because it is only
recognized in the mythology of the Outer-world,
drawn from the Phoenicians, while in the Iliad he
is the suitor of Charis' {Juventus Mundi^ p. 315).

Mr. Gladstone then proceeds to admit the con-
nexion of ' the Charites . . with the Sanscrit
Harits.' In such an instance as that of Aphrodite,
we cannot always begin de novo^ repeating time
after time arguments which have never been
answered. We must appeal to the general con-
census of scholars; and, as Mr. Farnell will probably
not be suspected of undue leanings towards Semitism,
I gladly call him as a witness. He gives a very
long, learned, able, and almost exhaustive analysis
of ' Aphrodite-worship,' regarded from the Hellenic
side {Cidfs, ii. 618-730); and his general conclusions
are as follows : —

1. Aphrodite was not an aboriginal Greek god-
dess.

2. She is nowhere in Greece regarded as
autochthonous.

3. Her mythic adoption by Dione is fictitious.

4. Her association with Hephaistos, Ares, the
Charites, etc., affords no proof of her Hellenic origin.

5. She is identical with ' the Semitic goddess of
Anterior Asia.'

6. Her maritime character is derived from the
non-Aryan East.

7. She is identical with the armed and warlike
goddess of the non- Aryan East, called by the
Kyprians Aphrodite Encheios (Of. 'Of the-spear,'
H^sychios).

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITTC SCHOOL I3I

8. Apliroclite Ourania^^Sem. 'Aschtharth Melekhet
Hascharaaim (Cf. Jer, vii. 1(S, etc.).

9. Prof. Hommel's view of the name-change : —
Ishtar- Ashtorct- Athtoret- Aphtoret-Aphrotet-'A^/9o-
hiTT], i^ ingenious. . but pliilological analogies are
wanting.'

At Athens, says Pausanias (I. xiv. 6) ' is a shrine
of Aphrodite Oiirania, who was iirst worshipped
by tlie Assyrian Sj and after them by the Paphians
of Kypros, and by the Phoenicians who dwelt at
Askalon in Palestine ; and from the Phoenicians
the people of Kythera learned her worship.' ' The
shrine of Ourania ' at Kythera ' is the most holy,
and of the temples of Aphrodite existing amongst
the Greeks the most ancient' {Ibid. III. xxiii. 1).

Let this much suffice concerning Aphrodite.

132

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

LIII

XVII. • Presenting Thebes'

The Tlieban mythic genealogy is as follows :-

__ro -^ r;-

Pqi-^

ai ^e

^ e o

C3 « ^H

O •.+^ rrt ^o

<1>

H a ^ ^ ^ 5

C/2 CD <;: ^
-^5 §^o =

S s ,+; ::^ "~^

^ f^ c^ O "^ t^
^ c3 ^fi 'o ^^ 4*

2 ^ <aj bJD

.,-1 ^ ,^ ^__^

>^ § i f^ --^^

S O ^S -rH -73 fH

••^ r^ h£^ o c -;5

03 I C

§ g g.^

o fl o /--v
tH o o 55

r-i p O
<J (D &0

'S^<1

S =4-1

3 O

^ ^ o
1^ g in o

^s 3

1_ Ph.2
50 ^

till

^ O cS _g

I O S d i^ O

■^'S rd tj

"^ S d

O Q q-i

a c» «

S Oi -V)

d ^ r-^

o r5 ::^ S

r^ <r-l O TS

a o

II - o ^
v_^ r I—? rt

^m;2

r§

^ '"'

>?^

^>.

O HH

SnP

^ d ll«

^ g p 0^

i^ g

cs 2

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 33

The name Dionysos. The Ak. c/z means 'to judge,'
the Bab. -As. dayan is 'a judge,' Heb. and Ph. dayon,
Cf. ' Dan ^\\2^ judge his people' (^Gen. xHx. 16). The
Bab- As. nisu is ' man,' Arab. 92«5, ' human beings,'
cui-nds^ ' the human race,' Heb. and Ph. anoshim. In
the cuneiform inscriptions we find a title of tlie Sun-
god which is expressed in several variant forms.
Thus, in W.A.L lY. xxviii. No. 1, 1. 6, we read : — 'Ilu
Samas Da-ai-nu tsi-ru (' The god the Sun, Judge
supreme'). In W.A.I. III. Ixvi. Col. E. 1. 40, the
Tablet containing ' a list of gods in the temples of
Babylonia and Assyria,' we read: — ^Ilu Di-va-nu-kha
[or K'ua] sa All (' The god Divanukha of the City.'
Or ' the god the Judge of the Oracle of the City').
In W.A.L 11. Ix. No. 2, 1. 40, we read :—Ilu Dayan
rahii m's-i {'' The god the Great Judge of men'), who
is identified with Nabu (= Na/3cb. LXX.) who was
orighially the Morning-sun (Vide Sayce, Bel. And,
Bahs. p. 118). Here we have a title of the Sun
Dayan-nlsi (' Judge-of-men '), which would reappear
in Ph. as ^Dayon anoshim. The Ph. Sacred Books,
etc., except the Fragments to which I refer in this
work, are lost. Such a word as nisi or noshi-m would,
as part of the name of a single personage, to a Greek,
as of course, become nysos; and hence the origin of the
Gk. name Dionysos, which the Greeks themselves
ultimately not unnaturally thought signified ' the
Zeus of Nysa,' a mysterious locality which was placed
almost everywhere. Such a form as Divanukha.^ if
that be the correct rendering, seems a suitable
source for the Thasian and Lesbian variants, Dionyxos.
From actual facts connected with the introduction of
his cult, to the Greeks Dionysos is primarily the
Sun-god who ripens the grape^ and thus gives wine.

134 HELLENIC .MYTHOLOGY [ill

As Prof. Sayce has suggested, it is exceedingly
probable that the cult of the god reached the Greeks,
especially in Asia Minor, through the Hittites, as well
as generally through the Phoenicians. The Dayan-
nisi ' of the City ' of course :r^-- the Ph. Melekh-qiryath
(Melqarth), and the 6 rrj^ -n-oXem Oeo^ Ac6vvao<;, as the
god was called at Teos (Vide B. Y. Head, Brit. Mus.
Cat. Gh. Coins of lon'ia^ p. 317. On the name
^Dionysos,' YideE. B. Jr., The Great Dlonysiak Myth,
ii. 207 et seq.). Prof. Miiller alludes to the etymon
of Dionysos proposed by Fox Talbot and myself,
remarking : —

'This conjecture, however, is no longer accepted
even by cuneiform scholars; no scholar now,
I believe, approves of it ' {C. p. 218).

He is quite mistaken on this point. Thus,
Mr. W. St. Chad Boscawen, the Assyriologist, when
speaking about the title Anax Andruii, remarks : —

' If, as Mr. Pobert Brown, Jun. has shown so
clearly, the origin of the Dionysiak Myth is to be
found in the Chaldean solar epithet of Diem nisi
(" Judge of men"),' may we not, etc. {Babijloniau cmd
Oriental Record, Dec. 189o, p. 94).

Speaking of the 'dukes' of Edom, Prof. Sayce

says : —

'Hadad was followed by Samlah of Masrekah
{Gen. xxxvi. 0(3) or the " Yinelands," in whose name
we discover that of a Phoenician god recorded in a
recently found inscription, as well as that of the Greek
Semele. . . As the worship of Dionysos had been
borrowed by the Greeks from the [non-Aryan] East,
it has long been assumed that the name of Semele

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 135

must be of Phoenician extraction ; but it was only in
1«S(S4 that a Phoenician inscription was found in a
bay to the west of the Peiraeos containing the name
Pen-'Samlath ("the foce of 'Samlath." ' Eel. Anct.
Bobs. p. 54).

Prof. Miiller could hardly overlook this passage,
and observes : —

' So long as there seemed to be some ground for
supposing that the Aryan words for wine were
derived from a Semitic language, there was some
excuse for looking to a Semitic language for an
explanation of the name of Dionysos or his mother
Semele. But now that the evidence points clearly to
an Aryan origin of oho^ and vinum, even that excuse
is gone' (a p. 217).

Is this so ? Curtius and Prof. Skeat {Eng, Etymol,
Diet, in voc. Wine) remark : —

' It is only among the Graeco-Italians that we find
a common name for the grajje and ita juice.'

Hehn, in his well-known and very valuable
Wanderings of Plants and Animals (Eng. edit, by
Stallybrass, p. 72) says : —

'That wine reached the Greeks through the
Semites we learn from the identity of name (Heb. yain^
Ethiop. and Arab, icain^ Gr. voinos, Lat. vinum).'

He shows at length that the Semites could not
have borrowed the word from the Graeco-Italians,
and that the Iranians had it not.

Wharton, in his admirable Etyma-Graeca^ 1882,
gives, without the slightest hesitation ' {olvt) vine,
olvo<^ wane (Lat. vinum^ Got. cein): Heb. yayin),^

13^ HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

' It is noticeable/ says Prof. Sayce, ' that the vine
appears to have been first met with in Babylonia '
{Assyrian Lects. p. 152). Its Akkadian name is gesdia
(' tree-of-hfe '). But I shall not pile up more
authorities. The reader will see that there is excuse
enough on this ground for looking to a Semitic
language for an explanation of the names ' Dionysos '
and ' Semele.'

But, continues Prof. Milller, because this Phoeni-
cian inscription has been found, therefore, it is stated,
' Semele, body and soul, is a corruption of the
Phoenician 'Samlath.'

He knows better than this, but he is too impatient
to consider the hated theory. He is well aware that
this inscription is only one piece of evidence, — a very
important one, I grant, neatly linking the Euphrates
Yalley with Hellas in the matter, — amongst an
immense mass. He has often justly resented such
treatment of his own identifications, when some
careless person made his whole case rest on this or
that point, ignored everything else, and, lastly,
derided him.

He continues : — 'How 'Samlath became Semele is
hardly asked.'

No, because it is so obvious : — The Ak. Samel d^
passing into a Semitic language, would take the
feminine /, becoming in Assyro-Baby Ionian Samelat
(Cf. Bila-^, Zarpani-^, Tasmiv, etc.), whence the
Phoenician 'Sam-lath, liut the Greek does not allow
female names ending in 6, Hence the equation
' Sa-m{e)-la{th) = Gk. tefjueX?], AVhat is amiss here?
And yet Prof. Milller solemnly warns Prof. Sayce

in] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 37

nncl other innocents that, at this rate, ' we shall soon
drop back into the days when Jovis was derived from
Jehovah.' Really this sort of thing tends to become
ridiculous.

But if the names of Kadmos and Semele are not
only Semitic, but even appear in the cuneiform
records, Ave need not be surprised to find tlie name
of Dionysos, grandson of the one and son of the
other, in the Babylonian inscriptions. As regards
the other chief name of the god, I have shown, and
supported each step by examples, that Melqarth ('the
City-king ') =^ Bakchos, the transitional forms being
M-I-q-r-t, M-l-q-r, B-k-r, B-k-o. If anyone is, prima
facie, mclined to dispute this, let him first study
Gesenius, and then read the section in my book on
the name ' Bakchos.'

Years ago Prof. Sayce wrote to me : —

' I think that your Dionysos has now become part
of our scientific heritage. You proved your view
so completely that it is now accepted on all sides as
a matter of course.'

Prof. Muller's book had not then been written.
But cannot he, with his vast knowledge, suggest an
Aryan etymon for ' Dionj^sos.' Ko, strange to say,
he cannot. He once made a suggestion in a former
work ; but as it does not appear in C, I will not
refer to it. Prof. Bechtel's amusing effort has been
noticed {SujJ. p. 16).

Like Poseidon, Dionysos is un anthropomorphic,
Dikerus, Kerasphoros, Keratophues, Kerus, Pyri-
phenges, Pyropos, Stylos (' the Pillar '), Taurokeros,
Taurometopos, Tauromorphos, Taurophues,Taur6pos,
etc., the horned, radiant and burning Sun -god, the

1 38 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

bull-lieadexl Dionysos Hyes=the Ox-headed (statue
of) Molekh. In Elis, the land of El, he was regarded
as the Sun {EtymoJ. Mey. in voc. Dionysos) ; and to
him sang the women : —

^Yj\6elv, rjpw Aiovvae, ^AXetcov e? vaov

dyvov avv l^apireaaiv, e? vaoi^

Tc5 IBoew TToBl Ovcov
d^ie ravpe, d^te ravpe.

(Phit. KephaL Katag. Hellen. xxxvi. 7).

No Ball-totem, my masters, remember. We have
got rid of that (Vide sup. p. 70).

The kosmic Sun-god, as of course, is a Yegetation-
god. Lord of Growth, but to limit him to this, to
turn him into a mere Corn-spirit, is puerile.

I am indebted to Prof. Sayce for the above inter-
pretation of Minos. The name is unconnected with
the Eg. Mena, or with Aryan man and mind words.

No Aryan etymon of the name ' Thebai ' is
possible. The Egyptian Thebes (= Tape, Thapa,
' the Head ') is unconnected; but the instance shows
a non- Aryan derivation of the same Greek-formed
name. There was a Thebe in Mysia, and the
Palestinian tOAvn-name Thebez {Jud. ix. 50), may
possibly be an allied form. From Homer and
Hesiod downwards the first prominent features
connected with the Boiotian Thebes are its seven
gates, which have ever been justly associated with
Semitic planetary worship. Without accepting every
detail given by the very learned Nonnos (v. ^\ et seq.),
we may undoubtedly admit the general principle.
Planetary symbolism in art had been practised in the
East from a remote antiquity. Thus the ornamenta-
tion of the walls of Ekbatana (Herod, i. 98) was
probably derived from that of the Temple of the

Ill] THE A RYO- SEMITIC SCHOOL 139

Seven Spheres (Planets) at ;P)arsipki (Borsippa) near
Babylon, the seven stages of which, beginning at tlie
base, were coloured Black for Ninip-Samclan ('the
Powerful ')-il-KYonos-Saturn, Orange for Marduk
(= Mer6dach)-Baal-Zeus-J^/^>//(?r, Red for Nergal-
Melekh (= Moloch)- Are s-ifars, Golden (thin gold
plates were actually used) for Samas-Melqarth-
Elektor-A^f^/, pale Yellow^ for Istar-Gidde (Cf. Gad,
god -of-good -luck, Is. Ixv. 1 1)- Aphrodite- Fe/zw5, Blue
for Nabd (=Neb6)-Taiit-Hermes-J/gr6'z^r//,and Silver
for ' A schtharth -Mene - Selene -Zz^ na.

The arrangement of the city of Thebes is exactly
in harmony with all this. We know from the testi-
mony of Dikaiarchos, who visited it, cir. B.C. 290,
shortly after its rebuilding by Kassandros on the
old lines, that it was ' circular ' ; and we learn from
Armenidas (ap. Souidas) that the Kadmeia or
Akropolis was styled MaKapcov vrjo-ot (' The Isles of
the Blessed'). This is clearly a mystical title, and
the general kosmic symbolism of the place makes it
possible that its name may really be the Sem. Teboh,
Arab, tabt^it, the ark, shrine, sacred spot — of the
Makarians, i.e., the followers of Dionysos-Melqarth,
which latter title appears all about the Mediterranean
coast in such forms as Makar, king of Lesbos ;
Makaria, ancient name of Lesbos and of Rhodes,
and name of a town of Kypros ; Makaria, da'ughter
of H^rakl^s-Melqarth, who, in true Phoenician style,
was sacrificed in order that a victory might be
obtained, and who gave her name to a fountain at
the Phoenician settlement of Marathon (Pans. I.
xxxii. 5 ; vide suj). p. 100) ; Makara, a town of
Sicily ; Makaraia, a town of Libya; etc. The gates
of the whole inclosure, including the Lower City

140 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

v/hich is that stated {OcL xi. 263) to have been
founded by Amphion (' the Dailj-sini.' Prof. Midler.)
and Zethos (for whose name there is no Aryan
etymon. Cf such Sem. names as Zetham, 1 Chron.
xxiii. 8), exactly correspond in order with the
planetary arrangement of the Borsippa Temple.
The First or Northern Gate Avas dedicated to the
Horned-moon, 'Aschtharth-Astarte-Mene. It was
also called the Hypsistan Gate, because near it stood
a temple of Zeus Hypsistos (= Sem. El-'Eli6n,
Gen. xiv. 22, ' God - most - high,' the 'EXtovv of
Sanchouniathon, i. 5. So Hesychios : 'EXiei;?- Zem eV
Brj^ai^). The Second or North-eastern Gate looked
towards Chalkis and was dedicated to Hermes, = (as
analogue) the Ph. Taiit, ' whom the Greeks called
Hermes (Sanch. i. 4). Taut = (as analogue) the
Bab. Nabu ('the Proclaimer' — of the Sun, primarily
the Sim himself, vide sup. p. 133), god of the planet
Mercury, As the Gk. Hermes was (wrongly) sup-
posed to = the Lat. Mercurius, w^e, on account of
this string of (practical, not philological) equations,
call the little planet Mercury. The Third or Eastern
Gate was dedicated to the armed Aphrodite (For
thirteen instances of her Hellenic cult, vide Farnell,
Cults^ J). 749), who represents (an original) Istar of
the Morning- star, goddess of war, who formed a
Diad with Istar of the Evening-star, goddess of love.
At Thebes this armed Aphrodite, Encheios (' Spear '-
goddess), was called Onka ('the Burning.' Vide
Berard, Cultes Arccid. p. 140, for the authorities, and
for nine instances of this name-formation in Boiotia
and Arkadia, two localities which constantly present
parallels. Semele was also known as Enchu. Hcsych.
in voc). Being a warlike goddess, the Greeks

Ill] THE AKYO- SEMITIC SCHOOL I4I

naturally called her Athena. Pausanias (IX. xii. 2)
expressly states that Oaka was a Phoenician word.
Maury refers to the ' Minerva virtus solis ' (Macrob.
Sat. i. 17). The Fourth or Southern Gate, the road
from which led to Plateia, was called ' the Elektran/
and dedicated to the Sun (Elektor), Bab.-As. Samas-
Dayan-nisi, Ph. Shemesh-Melqarth, Gk. Bakchos-
Dionysos. The Phoenician divinity Eschmun, eighth
and highest of the Kabirim, also appears at Thebes
and in his solar phase (Vide sui). p. 111). To the
Greeks he became Apollun Ismenios. The Fifth
or Western Gate was dedicated to the War-god, the
Bab.-As. Nergal (' the Strong '), originally god of
death and the Under-world, and thus placed on the
side of Erebos (Darkness), the Phoenician Usav or
Uscho (Gk. Ous6os)-Harekhal, Gk. Ares-Herakles,
Lat. Mars. As Schroeder and Lenormant have
proved, a form such as the Gk. Ou-s6os represents an
original Bo-soos {e.g.^ Ph. Bo-dam = Gk. Ou-dam),
and Bo is a contraction of Bar {e.g., ' ^6>-milcar pro
5ar-milcar '). Hence, Bosoos = Ph. Bar-sav (Cf.
Heb. Esav), 'the Son-of-hair ', = ' the Hairy-one/
Ousoos, ' who was the first who made clothes of the
skins of animals which he slew . . . and was the
first who launched a boat' (Sanch. i. 3), Herakles
in his lion's skin, sailing westward to his Pillars in
the golden solar boat-cup. Another great solar hero
is a variant phase of this concept ; the Ph. Bar-sav
= Gk. Per-seus, whose name in Greek might mean
' Destroyer,' and who delivers Andro-meda, Ph.
Adam-math (' the Rosy,' z.e., ' Beautiful '), daughter
of Kepheus ( = Ph. Keph, the heavenly ' Stone,'
Aramaic Keplias), the Phoenician Baitulos ( = Ph.
Bethel), 'the Living-stone' ; for the god Schama

142 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

( = Gk. Ouranos) endowed certain ^atrvXia with souls
(Sanch. i. 6.). 'I'he myth reappears at Thebes,
where, as Amphion plays on his phorminx heptatonos
('seven-stringed harp,' the seven tones corresponding
with the seven planets), the ' lively stones ' rise and
form the city wall (Pans. IX. v. 4).

The Sixth or North Western Gate was dedicated
to the Bab. Bilu-Maraduku ( = Bel-Merodach), Ph.
Baal, Gk. Zeus-Belos, Lat. Jupiter. My meaning in
making these comparisons will not, I presume, be
misunderstood. The equation between Bel and Baal,
on the one hand, and Zeus and Jupiter on the other
is not that they are identical concepts or philological
variants ; but simply that they are the correspond-
ing personages in the several Pantheons. It was
because the Babylonians had connected their chief
god with the planet Jupitei\ that the Greeks con-
nected their chief god (Zeus) with it.

The Seventh or N.N.W. Gate of Thebes was
dedicated to the Babylonian god whose name was
formerly read as Adar, but who is now provisionally
called Nin-ip. One title of his, Uras Q the Veiled-
one ') is quite certain. He reappears westward as the
Phoiniko-Greek Il-Kronos, identified (wrongly) with
the Lat. Saturnus. He is the Ph. Schame-merum
(= Gk. Samemroumos), whose name is translated
by Philon as Hypsouranios ('the High-celestial'),
/.^., in a planetary phase, Saturn^ highest of the
planets. This planet, Ak. Ginna (' Commander,*
' leader '), in Bab. -As. is Ka-ai-wa-nu,or Ka-ai-nu, Ph.
Kiydn (Cliiun. Amos, v. 26), Hittite Ken, ' the Pillar '
(Cf. Dionysos Stylos) whence the Gk. klwv. The
Phoenician pillar- cult is familiar. The two pillars
which Herodotos (ii. 44) describes at the temple of

Ill] THE ARYO -SEMITIC SCHOOL I 43

H^rakl^s-Melqartli at Tyre, tlie pillars of Solomon's
temple, the two obelisks of Egyptian temples, the two
minarets of the modern mosque supply connected
examples.

As the forms of Yedic divinities are often shadowy,
glide into each other and coalesce, so do the variant
god-phases of the Eastern Mediterranean. The
original idea in each case, could we reach it, is
always natural, simple, logical. The development by
many minds of many nations often produces apparent
confusion, discord and contradiction.

Says Lenormant : —

' Dans le personnage de Cadmus, deux idees, deux-
figures distinctes se fondent en une seule. Cadmus
est en meme temps V oriental^ le chef de la principale
colonic phenicienne en Gvhce^et Tim, des dieiix dont le
culte fut apporte par cette colonic [The Diad of god
and god-introducer.]. Aussi, a Sparte ex a Thebes,
Cadmus est il honore comme une divinity. Dans les
mysteres phenico-pelasgiques de Samothrace, un des
Cabires se nomme Cadmus ou Cadmilus, corrompu
ensuite en Gasmilos et CamiUos.^ Kadmilos = Qedem-
el {^= ' qui coram Deo stat '), a title which includes
the ideas '- d'un dieu ministre ou demiurge, et d'une
manifestation exterieure de la divinite supreme '
{Les Prem. Civ.u. 322). This Samothracian Kadmilos
being thus the administer of the Kabirim, is called
Hermes by the Alexandrian grammarian Dionysid-
oros; so we find that ' Tuscos Camillum a23pellare
Mercurium ' (Macrob. Sat. iii. 8). According to the
Alexandrian grammarian Mnaseas, the chief Kabeiric
triad consisted of personages whom he calls Axieros
( — Zeus. SchoJ. Apollon. Rhod.), Axiokersos {--

I_j.4 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Dionysos. 2/>/V/.),ancl Axiokerse(= Aphrodite. Skopas),
with Kasmilos as their assistant. It is a curious
fact that in W.A.I. HI. Ivii. No. 2, 1. 2-5, we find four
stars called Kas-mi-lu, Kas-u-zu-gur (lacuna), Kas-si-
U-su, and Kas-sa. It may be that Kasmilos is not a
corruption of Kadmilos, but an independent word;
and, without any dogmatism in the matter, it almost
seems as if we had here the following equations : —
Kasmilu = Kasmilos ; Kasuzugur = Axioher (sos) ;
Kassihisu = Axioherse ; and Kassa = Ax{er{os). In
Ak. Kas means ' double.' If each of these are diads,
the combination might perhaps represent the eight
Kabirim, the seven + Eschmun. I will not pursue the
enquiry here; but the judicious reader will observe
that an exhaustive knowledge of the cuneiform
remains would probably enable us to clear up
very many obscurities (For further consideration of
the subject, vide R. B. Jr., The Great Dionijsiak
Myth, ii. 212 et seq.).

XVIII. A Semitic Moon-myth
Opposed to the dark, mourning and chthonian
goddess of the Semites who appears in Hellas now
as Demeter Melaine (Vide suj). p. 41) and again as
Aplirodite Melanis (Pans. II. ii. 4), etc. is the ' Reine
de la lumi^re, I'Ourania-Korc-Soteira une deesse
blanche' (Berard, Cultes Arcad. p. 182, where many
references to the Semitic Leukothea are collected).
The cult of Ino was well known in Greece. Near
Meo-ara was shown the rock whence tradition said
she had leapt into the sea with her child Melikertes
(=Mehkarthos, Philon's transliteration of Melqarth
or Melqart) to avoid the fury of her husband Athamas

in] THE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 45

Paus. I. xliv. 11). In the temple of Palaimon (= Sem.
Baal-hamon) at Korinth stood statues of Poseidon, Ino-
Leukotheaand Melikertes-Palairnon himself {Ibid. II.
ii. 1). Not far from the promontory of Maleia Avas
the Lake of Ino, near which her festival was kept.
The goddess (= the Moon) was regarded as the nurse
of Dionysos (=the young Sun of the next day. Ibid.
III. xxiv. 3). Not far from Korone in Messenia,
and near the seashore, was a temple of Ino at a place
where the goddess was said to have landed, and where
she was worshipped under the name of Leukothea
{Ibid. III. xxxiv. 2).

It is Homer who pourtrays her in her most charm-
ing aspect. As the luckless Odysseus is tossed to
and fro on his raft in the darkness, for the poet
specially notices that ' down sped night from heaven,'
the daughter of Kadmos marked him, fair-ankled Ino
(= the Moon walking in brightness), and gave him
her veil divine (= the line of moon-light) to wind
around his breast as help and guidance to him on his
way. Of course he could not retain this head dress:
the moon would take her light with her when she
went. And so we read that when he reached safety,
he let the veil fall from him, 'and quickly Ino caught
it in her hands ' ( Od. v. 461-2).

XIX. Athamas = Tammuz

The gentle Moon-goddess, mother or nurse of next
day's sun, Melikertes or Dionysos^ must fly from her
mate, the rao-ino; Sun-o^od. So to avoid her husband
Athamas ( = Herakles Mamomenos), driven mad by
the hostile Aryan goddess Here, Ino, as we have

146 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

seen, sinks in the sea. This alternate flight and
pursuit of Sun and Moon has given rise to the famous
story of the contest between the Lion ( = Sun) and
the Unicorn ( = Moon. Yide R. B. Jr., The Unicorn) ;
and also to another very curious myth, preserved in
all its details in heraldic legend, viz., the flight of the
Leopard ( = Stars) from the Lion, and the subse-
quent devouring of the latter by the former, when
the noble beast has got stuck fast in the narrow
entrance of the Leopard's cave, i,e.^ in the dark
narrow passage leading to the Under-world. Athamas,
'in Ionic Tammas ' (K. 0. Midler, Orchomenos und
die Minyer^ p. 156), and hence the a is prosthetic, and
the name is unconnected with the Aryan root atli^ is
son of Aiolos ; and ' everything combines to raise
the presumption about the Phoenicianism of the
Aiolids, to the rank of a rational conclusion ' (Glad-
stone, Juv. Mun. p. 137). The god of Athamas was
the Phoenician Kronos-Melekh, Zeus Laphystios ('the
Gluttonous,' i.e.^ desirous of human sacrifices), whose
cult obtained amongst the Minyai ( = the men of
Minos and the Minoa, vide sup, p. 132), who had
established an archaic civilization at lolkos (A^ide inf.
p. 194) and in northern Boiotia. The principal
T€/jLevo^ ('sacred enclosure') of this divinity was not
far from Koroneia ; and there, according to the
legend, Athamas, like a true Phoenician, was about
to sacrifice his Aryan children Phrixos and Helle to
the Laphystian Zeus, when they were rescued by
the Golden Ram (Paus. IX. xxxiv. 4). This Ram,
the 'pecus Athamantidos,' was always identified
with the zodiacal Aries^ which figure, as I have
abundantly proved elsewhere, is a stellar redupHca-
tion of the original golden solar Ram, alike famous

Ill] THE ARYO -SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 47

in Babylonia, Egypt, or India. Now whenever in
Greek legend we meet with one of the ancient
constellation-fiofures, there is Phoenician influence.
Pausanias (I. xxiv. 1) is quite aware that 'the god
who is called Laphystios among the Orchomenians,'
was not a Hellenic divinity. The human-sacrifice-cult
which obtained amongst the supposed descendants
of Athamas in connexion with the Laphystian Zeus,
is very familiar from the account in Herodotos (vii.
197) ; and I may observe that there is no real
evidence that human sacrifices were ever offered by
any archaic Greeks entirely untouched by Semitic
influence. M. Berard has absolutely demonstrated
by a most elaborate investigation of locality, art,
ritual and names, that Zeus Lykaios, to whom such
sacrifices were undoubtedly offered, was the Phoeni-
cian Baal; and, as such, identical with Zeus
Laphystios. Take another instance. Just before
the battle of Salamis Euphrantides, the soothsayer,
insisted that three beautiful captives on the galley of
Themistokles shoukl be sacrificed to Bakchos Omest^s
('the Devourer-of-raw-flesh,' =Zeus Laphystios).
Themistokles 'was astonished at the strangeness and
cruelty of the order,' but the highly excited Athenian
sailors insisted on its being carried out (Plut. Themis,
xxiii). Here is an illustration alike of the Phoeni-
cian character of Dionysos, and of the lingering force
of archaic cruel superstitions, Phoenician in origin,
stung into a last spasm of hateful life in that awful
moment when the existence of a nation trembled in
the balance. When we meet with statements about
human sacrifices in late authors, e.g., Porphyry, the
first question to be considered is. Of what divinity
is he speaking ? If Artemis be named, who is really

10 ^

148 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

meant by Artemis? She probably will not be the
Aryan sister of Apollon ; and whatever Porphyry
himself may have thought on such a point is quite
immaterial. ^Ir. Hogarth, in a remarkable passage
on the Thebans of the fourth century B.C., observes : —

' The Cadmeian characteristics are those of a con-
quering people of the East. . . The Cadmeian was
an alien in Boeotia in a far more real sense than the
Dorian Spartan among the earlier races of the
Peloponnese . . The familiar legends of Thebes are
as gloomy as the horrible nature myths of the East.
(Edipus; the man-eating Sphinx ; Agave and her
hideous orgy ; Dirce tied to the wild bull's horns —
all these forms of horror find parallels in Thrace,
Phrygia or Phoenicia rather than in Hellas. Even
in 371 the Theban commanders at Leuctra could
debate the propriety of offering human sacrifice to
the unpropitious gods ' {Philip and Alex, of Macedon^
pp. 34-5 ; vide Plut. Pel op. xxi).

The foregoing considerations, with much other
evidence, long since made it clear to me that
Athamas-Tammas = Tammuz-Adoni ('My Lord,'
Gk. Adonis), the familiar Sun-god of Syria {{.e.^ the
Land of the Suri. Vide Hommel, And. Heh. Trad.
p. 210) and Phoenicia. In Nov. 1883 Prof. Sayce,
than whom no one is more qualified to give an
opinion on such a question, wrote congratulating me
on my discovery 'that Athamas is Tammuz'; and
in his Herod, (p. 97) refers to 'the Phoenician legend
of Athamas orTammuz, the Sun-god.' The Ak. Sun-
god Duwu-zi (' Son-of-life'), a name understood by
the Semites as meaning ' the Only-son,' became
with them Timmuz or Tammuz ; and the loves of

in] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 49

Tstar and Duzu (the shortened form of the god's
name), were reduplicated m those of Aphrodite
and Adonis. The Sveeping for Tammuz ' (Ez. viii. 14)
began with the Phoenician cry Ai-Ienu (' Alas for
us !' Gk. alXLvo^.)^ the dirge, personified as Linos.

XX. Kirke

In a special monograph {The Myth of Kirhe)
I have minutely considered the history of this
Homeric Moon-goddess of the Outer-world, Kirke
(' the Eound ' =the Full-moon) of ' the Aiaian isle ';
and have shown that Aia, the moon -island, is a
reduplication of the Moon-goddess, 'own sister to the
wise and terrible Aietes' {Od. x. 137) = Lunus.
Instances of this Turanian (by which T mean non-
Aryan and non- Semitic) moon-name are as follows : —

Ak. A^ Aa^ the Moon-goddess (Cf. Eg. adh^ 'moon'),
I-du ('the Goer,' a name corresponding with the
Aryan moon-name lo, ' the Goer'), which appears in
HesychlOS as 'AtSo), 'AtS^?* 77 aeXrjVT] irapa ^aXSaLOL<;.
'AtS^9 = WiTJrrjf;, mythic king of Kolchis, and son of
Helios. Luna is 'own-sister' to Lunus. As. -Turkic,
Osmanli At^ Siberian Tatars a?/, Ostiak z-re, Taugy z'-rz,
Tomskoi-Ostiak i-rraen^ Buriat lia-ra^ Samoied ^z'-r/y,
6-ra, Ak. i-tu^i-du^ 'month,' Etruscan ai-vil { = annus^
as moon-marked), Et.-Lat. i-tis^ I'-tus, 'the half
month, time of the half-moon,' l-dus^ i-du-Iis^ the
sheep sacrificed at the Ides. I presume it will now
be admitted, after the researches of Canon Is. Taylor,
Prof Pauli, and others, that Etruscan is a non-Aryan
language (Yide R. B. Jr., Tlte Etruscan Numerals^
1889).

That the Kirke -myth is entirely Euphratean in
origin, is fully proved in my book ; and is quite

150 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

admitted by Prof. Sayce, wlio says, ' Your com-
parison of the myth of Kirke with that of the
lovers of Istar is as self-convincing as your discovery
that Athamas is Tammuz ' (Vide sup. p. 148).
Mr. Gladstone, whose acuteness had discerned in
the Homeric Ketaioi, the people called by the
Egyptians Kheta, and by the Assyrians Khatti, l.e.^
the Hittites, saw at once how well a Euphratean
origin of the Kirke tale harmonized with all the
Homeric and other facts of the case, and wrote,
' I hail the doctrine that Kirke is Euphratean.' The
book was also warmly commended by Prof. Tiele,
an authority whose praise is especially valuable ;
and I mention these circumstances because, as
noticed {sup. p. ol), this monograph was fiercely
attacked and its statements gravely misrepresented.

The Homeric poems supply many instances of the
use of non- Aryan names and words, e.g. : — Aia,
Aietes, Aigyptos {=^ Eg. Ha-Ka-Ptah, ' House-of-the-
worship-of-Ptah.' Brugsch.), Aphrodite, Assarakos
(= Assor-akhu, ' Assor is my protector '), Dardanos
(Cf. As. Tartan, ' Commander-in-chief), Dionysos,
Erebos, Dos ( = Hu, II, El), Kadmos, Keteioi,
Kimmerioi ( = the Gimirraai, whose country
was N.E. of Assyria), Kion ( = the Sem. Pilhir-god,
Dionysos-Stylos, Zeus-Meilichios, who was repre-
sented at Sikyun in pyramidal form, whilst by him
was the statue of the Semitic goddess called Artemis
Patroa, Pans. 11. ix. 6, ' Belonging-to-one's-father-
land,' set up by some Phoenician immigrant),
Kronos, Orion (Vide inf. p. 172)^ Poseidon, Ehada-
manthos, Sarpedon ( = ' the Sapardian'), Thebe,
Thebaic chalkos ( = Sem. chdldk^ ' smooth '), chrusos
( = Sem. kharouis, As. Jchuratsu^ ' gold '), krokos

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL I5I

( = Sem. I'arhhv)^ l-j/parissos ( = Seiii. Jcojjlier), Jeov^
Kretan lis ( = Sem. layish)^ phi/kos ( = Sem. pouk,
' tangle '), etc.

XXI. The Homeric 'Nekyia'
From Kirke to the Nekyia is a natural transition,
and it is now generally acknowledged that, not
merely is the whole tone and presentation of the
Under-world in Od. xi. un-Hellenic, — although of
course grandly adorned by the splendour of Greek
genius and the beauty of Greek feeling, — but that
this gloomy realm is actually identical with the
Euphratean Under- world and with the Scheol of
Phoenician and Hebrew, so vividly brought before us
in the Old Testament. For detailed examination of
the various points and incidents in the visit of
Odysseus to Hades, I would refer the reader to
Gladstone, Homeric Synchronism (1876), p. 219
et seq,^ and to my Myth of Kirke^ p. 96 et seg. ; and
will here mainly confine myself to the question in its
general form. I am happy to be able to quote Prof.
Milller as being in harmony with the above view.
In his Anthropological Religion (1891), Lect. xi.
' Soul after Death,' speaking on this subject, he
says : —

'The Nekyia does not represent the popular
[Greek] belief. . . . The Homeric poems are a
splendid fragment, but they are a fragment only of
ancient Greek thought. . . . Many scholars in
describing to us what the ancient Greeks thought
about life after death, have taken [the] Nekyia for
their chief, nay for their only guide. But this very
rhapsody has by some excellent critics been con-

152 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

sidered as very peculiar and exceptional, and as being
possibly the work of a different, probably a Bcrotian
poet. . . . Homer does not reflect popular opinion
on death.'

As to what we ought rightl}' to understand by the
name ' Homer,' and on the question of the authorship
of Od, xi., I give no opinion here ; suffice it to note
that Prof. Midler is fully aware of the un-Hellenic
tone and character of the relation, and that he
specially connects it with Boiotia, Le.^ practically
with Phoenicia. We see how deeply Boiotia had
stamped her special influence on both Homer and
Hesiod, as we know them.

Looking then at the Homeric account in a general
way, we observe that king Odysseus, like king
Saul, would consult the shade of a majestic prophet
respecting his future destiny. He reaches the
appointed spot, performs the appropriate ritual, and
' anon came the soul of Teiresias with a golden
sceptre in his hand.' He knows Odysseus, remembers
the past, foretells the future, and then ' went back
within the house of Hades,' which is described as ' a
land desolate of joy,' where dwell ' the strengthless
heads of the dead,' ' phantoms of men outworn.'
' All go unto one place ' {Ec. iii. 20), Teiresias,
Achilleus, Tantalos ; good, bad and indifferent, great
and small, Samuel, Saul, Jonathan. True there are
divisions in this place, as indicated alike in the legend
of the Descent of Istar, and in the account of Dives
and Lazarus. In the Hades of the Kehjia there is
a sort of penal settlement, where Sisyphos and other
great offendei's are tormented ; and there is some gulf
01' gap betwixt them and 'the mead of asphodel,' where

in] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 53

dwell the shades of the great heroes and their
attendants. This dread part of Hades recalls the
Abaddon (' Place-of-destruction ') of the Old Testa-
ment. ' Scheol and Abaddon are before Yahveh '
{Prov. XV. 11), /.^., ' Scheol is naked before Him and
Abaddon hath no covering' {Joh^ xxvi. 6); and they
'are never full' {Prov. xxvii. 20). Yet there is
room. And ' the Dead know not anything ' {Ec. ix. 5)
that is happening in the Upper-world. Agamemnon
and Achilleus wo!ild fain hear from Odysseus of the
doings of their sons. The writer of Ecdeslastes does
not mean that the Dead do not exist ; but those Tvho
pass 'the gates of Scheol' (Is. xxxviii. 10), the
Rephaim {Ps, Ixxxviii. 10), z.e., ' Weak-ones,' become
' strengthless.' Therefore Scheol cannot praise Yah
{lb. cxv. 17), a name which = the Bab. Ya, as
Yahveh, Yahweh = Bab. Yawa (Vide T. G. Pinches,
in Proc. Soc. Bib. Archaeol. Nov. 1892, p. 19 et seq.:
Hommel, Anct. Heh. TracL pp. 113, 145); for, it is
a rule ' since man was placed upon earth ' that ' he
shall fly away as a dream, and shall not be found '
{Joh^ XX. 4, 8); or, as Antikleia says in the Nehyia^
' The spirit like a dream flies forth.' She herself
flits from the hands of Odysseus ' as a shadow or
even as a dream ' ; and the shades of the Suitors
pass ' as bats flit gibbering in the secret place of a
wondrous cave,' which Scheol is. The Homeric
picture of Scheol was limned centuries prior to the
Captivity ; it was not borrowed from the Babylonia
of Nebuchadrezzar the Great. And when Ezekiel
(xxxii.) draws his weird dark scene of Scheol-Hades,
to which the kings and multitudes of Egypt, Assur,
Elam, and other neighbouring nations were to
descend, and where, like Agamemnon and Achilleus,

T54 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

they converse, he. a priest of Israel, one who has
been styled a ' Hio;h Churchman,' had not abandoned
at a moment's notice his own national belief and
accepted that of Babylonia. He merely o-ave utter-
ance to the faith which he and his people had shared
for centuries, alike with Babylonia and with the
other nations of Western Asia, for all of whom this
Nekyia-Scheol was an undoubted article of faith.
The same remark applies to the Scheol-passages in
the Psalms ; whether pre-Exilic or post-Exilic, they
are in exact accordance with archaic and pre-Exilic
thought. Men ' like sheep are laid in Scheol ; Death
is their shepherd . . . and their beauty shall the
Under-world consume away' {Ps, xlix. 14). But,
according to early Euphratean belief, deliverance
from this state of things was possible in some cases.
Thus, in Greek legend, Theseus had been rescued
from Hades ; and, similarly, the Psalmist asserts,
' God will redeem my soul from the power of Scheol
{lb, 15); whilst the pre-Exilic Hosea (xiii. 14)
exclaims, ' 1 will ransom them from the power of
Scheol ; I will redeem them from death : 0 Death,
where are thy plagues? 0 Scheol, where is thy
destruction?' The 'high goddess' Persephoneia of
the Homeric Kekyia, who is spoken of as the leading
ruler of the Under-world, whilst Aidoneus is entirely
passed over, is a reduplication of the Ak. Ninkigal
(' Queen-of-the-Great-place,' i.e., the Under-world),
the As. Allat, also called Ninge (' Queen-of-the-
Under-world '), and whose husband is Mulge (' King-
of-the-Under-world'), identical Avith Mul-lil (Vide
sup. p. 7^),

Ill

] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 155

XXII. Hekate
We now approach a mysterious mythic personage
whose origin is especially difficult to determine. It
is easy to say at once, in accordance with general
opinion, that Hekate (' the Far-darting ') is the rayed
Moon, the moon being ever connected with triplicity ;
and that her phases of concept from grandeur and
beauty down to horror and deformity, from the
Hekate of Hesiod to the Hekate of Shakspere, repre-
sent the splendour and dignity of the Night-queen
combined with the horror of darkness as linked with
evil dreams, ghosts and hends. All this may be,
and probably is, quite true so far as it goes ; but a
careful examination of the history of the goddess
makes us doubt its sufficiency, as an exhaustive
explanation of the myth. As to the name, many
names purely Greek in form are either actually
transliterations of non- Aryan names, or are put for
them on account of similarity of sound. Thus, when
a Phoenician Baal, appeased by human sacrihces,
is called Meilichios ('the Gentle'), a euphemistic
appellation, hke Hekate Meilione, the Eumenides,
Euxine, etc., such a title covers both the Greek
word fi6i\iKo<^, fjieikUio<^ and the Semitic word
inelekh ('king'). The name, therefore, is quite
inconclusive. Much of the ' learning ' respecting
Hekate has been carefully collected by Mr. Farnell
{Cidts^ cap. xvi). As he notes, ^tending (in
Roscher's Lpx. Hekate) ' tacitly ' accepts the view
that she was (originally) ' a Hellenic divinity.' But,
as he further observes, the goddess has ' no fixed and
accepted genealogy ' ; and the famous passage about
her in the Theogony is clearly an interpolation. ' It
may be,^ he says, ' that her cult invaded Greece,

^5^ HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

starting from the same land and following the sam.e
track as that of Dionysos.' In a word, he gives
many excellent reasons in support of the view that
the goddess is not in origin a Greek divinity; but
hardly any evidence in favour of his own theory that
she came to Hellas from the North. Of late the
evidence in support of her non-Aryan origin has
decidedly increased. M. Berard {Cultes Arcad.
p. H62) argues strongly in favour of a Semitic origin;
observing, ' La comparaison entre Hecate et Baalat
s'impose. H serait etrange que deux peuples soient
arrives separement a la meme conception d'une triple
deesse celeste, terrestre, infernale;' and proceeds to
support his view by much interesting evidence.
Amongst other points which may be urged in favour
of a Semitic origin of the goddess are:— (1) Her
position, as altogether distinct from the Zeus-
family; (2) her participation in the Kabeiric cult of
Samothrake; (3) her connexion with horsemen and
sailors; and (4) with Boiotia and Boiotian poets;
(5) her tripHcity; (6) her connexion with the Kretan
Britomartis, Diktynna, the Net (SIktuov)- goddess,
Aphrodite of the Net {Od, viii), Eurynome and
Andromeda of the Chains, and whose Phoenician
name Ast-No'ema (=Gk. Astynome) reappears in the
Kretan translation as Britomartis ('the Sweet-virgin'),
' quod sermone nostro sonat virginem dulcem '
(Solinus, xi. 8); (7) her titles Angelos, Eurippa,
Suteira and Kalliste ; and (8) lier connexion with
Semele, for ' alii x^^^^^^ 'E/cdrTjv, Boeotii Semelam
credunt ' (Macrob. I. xii. 23).

There is, however, yet another theory respecting
the goddess, one which I formerly regarded as devoid
of weight, but which, in the face of increasing

hi] the aryo-semitic school 157

evidence, I feel bound to present to the reader.
Intercourse between Egypt and Phoenicia obtained
from an exceedingly remote period; and there was
a close connexion between the worship of the great
Lower-Egypt-god Ptah or Phthah (the Memphic
dialect form of the name) and the Pataikoi-cult of the
Phoenicians. Ptah, the demiurge, ' the Artisan '
(hence by Greeks called Hcphaistos), was often
represented as a pigmy-figure, connected in idea with
the embryo and similar to the dwarf Kabeiric figures
with which the Phoenicians ornamented the prows of
their war-galleys (Vide Herod, iii. 37). The Frog,
called by the Graeco- Egyptian writer whom we know
as Horapollon, 'the representative of man in embryo,'
was a symbol of Ptah ; and on the wall of the temple
at El-Khargeh, ' the ancient oasis of Amnion, in the
Libyan desert,' were ' representations of the four
elements divided into the male and female principle
. . . represented snake-headed and frog-headed,
holding their hands up in adoration ' (Birch, in
Trans, Soc. Bib. Archaeol. v. 295). One of these
Diads is called Hehu, male, Ilehu-t, female, the t,
as in Semitic, marking tlie feminine termination,
lamblichos, when speaking of Ptah, also alludes to
these eight powers (Cf. the seven Kabirim and
Eschmim, ' the Eighth '), ' four being male and four
female ' {Peri Myst. viii. 3) ; and in the Egyptian myth-
ology we meet with the frog-headed goddess Heka,
whom Birch (in Wilkinson's Anct, Egyptians^ iii. 22)
states ' symbolises the female principle of water.'
In a popular story ' current at [the Egyptian]
Thebes in the first years of the N^ew Empire,' the
goddess Hiquit or Heqit, ' the frog-goddess . . . one
of the midwives who is present at the birth of the

158 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

sun every morning,' is told to hasten with certain
other goddesses to deliver a woman named Ruditdidit
of ' three children' (Vide Maspero, Dawn of Clviliza-
f/'on, p. 388). Here we have a Heqit connected with
triplicity; and Mr. F. Legge {A Coptic Spell of the
Second Centurij^ in Proc. Soc. Bib. Archaeol.
May, 1897), apropos of the passage in the Incanta-
tion, ' Ban bo, nourisher of oxen, nourisher of all
things,' observes that ' in all the spells of the post-
Christian Magic Papyri, Baubo [of Eleusinian fame]
and Hecate are treated as the same person.' ' In the
longer invocation from which it is apparently copied,
Hecate is addressed as (j^powrj or " she-toad." ' He
then refers to the ' Egyptian goddess Hek-t,' remark-
ing, ' It is possibly she who was introduced into the
Eleusinia under the name of Hecate. No really
satisfactory etymology of the name Hecate has yet
been given. If this be so, the patron goddess of
sorcery . . . would seem to have had an Egyptian
origin.'

Without pretending in this brief notice to solve
so difficult a problem, I may add one or two further
considerations. The equation Eg. Heqit = Gk. Hekate
is excellent, but this identification may perhaps not
have been made until very late times ; and of course
it does not decide that the two were originally
identical. The circumstance that neither Phoenicians
nor Greeks possessed a frog-headed goddess is
immaterial. Nothing but the intense philosophical
symbolism of Egypt (by some confused with totemism)
could have endured such a concept in concrete form.
I know of no absolutely certain evidence of any
direct archaic intercourse between Egypt and Hellas ;
but that Egyptian art had a considerable influence

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL I 59

on that vanished civilization which we call Mykenaean
is indisputable. Moreover, in Rhadamanthys (Vide
sup. p. 132) we have, even in Homer, the undoubted
figure of an Egyptian Sun-god. It is, on the whole,
therefore, perfectly possible that the cult of Hekate
may have been originally Egyptian ; and may have
reached Hellas through the Phoenicians. In this
case she would naturally be more and more assimi-
lated to such a goddess as the Semitic Baalath ; and
the fact that her cult widely obtained on the coast of
Asia Minor and in the islands of the Aigaion, is quite
in harmony with this. In Greek belief Aiakos was
associated with the Phoenician Minos and the
Egyptian Rhadamanthys in the High Commission of
the Judges of the Under-world ; and Aiakos was the
famous king of Aigina ('the Goat '-island), a special
possession of Poseidon. ' And of all the divinities
the Aigin^tans honour Hekate the most, and celebrate
her rites annually, saying that Orpheus the Thrakian
introduced them [These baseless statements about
an imaginary Orpheus have raised the idea that the
Hecate-ritual came from the North.]. Alkamenes
[b.c. 440-400], as it seems to me, was the first who
made the statue of Hekate with three heads and three
bodies ' (Pans. II. xxx. 2). Dogs were sacrificed to
her (Yide Farnell, Cults^ p. 597, for the various
references), as to the Tyrian H^rakles^ Malekh-Bel,
and to Melekhet - Artemis (Vide Movers, Die
Fhonizier, p. 404 et seq.) ; and she was even at times
represented as dog-headed (Yide Hesych. in voc.
Hekates agalma). I quite agree with Mr. Farnell
that the belief of early Greece, as we know it, does
not show us Hekate in the lofty and varied position
and character which is attributed to her by the

l6o HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

author of the inserted passage, Tlieogonia^ 409-52.
But I do not doubt that this poet was far better
acquainted with her archaic history than we can be ;
and that he would not have ventured merely to draw
on his imagination in the matter; especially when
all had to be inserted in so famous and semi- sacred a
work as the Greek Book of the Generations. There is
one remarkable epithet a]:)plied to her which exactly
agrees with the first appearance of Heqit in Egyptian
myth as 'the Midwife.' Hekate is 'from the
beginning the Foster-mother ' or ' Nursing-mother '
{KovpoTp6(^os:) ; and, again, at Athens ' the Gene-
tyllides, the divine midwives . . . were sometimes
identified with Hekate' (Farnell, Gidts^ p. 519).
She, says the poet, can increase the flocks and herds.
It is not improbable that Kourotrophos was originally
a translation of what Mr. Farnell calls ' the inexplic-
able epithet KeX/ca/a,' which, applied to Artemis on
account of her mythic resemblance to Hekate, really
belongs to the latter (Vide //;. p. 518). The title,
probably formed from the Sem. Icilkai-I^ ' to sustain,'
' nourish,' will thus mean ' the Nurturer.'

XXIII. Athene Ilia

Reading the Iliad as a child, I used to think that
the conduct of Athene towards the Trojans, and her
unrelenting hatred of them were very cruel, consider-
ing the honour they paid her, and the efforts they
made to appease her. In //. vi. we read that on the
direction of Helenos, ' far best of augurs ', Hekab^
and the Trojan women repaired to the temple ot
Athene in the citadel and presented the goddess with

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL l6l

a superb Sidoniau peplos^ which Theano, the priestess,
laid on the knees of her statue, and, at the same time
prayed to her, in very touching words^ to ' have
mercy on the city and the little children. So spake
she praying, but Pallas Athene denied the prayer.'
The poet evidently regards the Ilian, as identical
with the Attic, Athene ; but such was not the case.
The goddess in question was really the Phrygian
Ate. I lion was founded eirl rbv Xejofievov T779 ^pvyLa<;
"At?;? \6(I)ov (ApoUod. III. xii. 3) ; and hence was
called "At?;? Xocpo^;' ovrayf; to ^'IXiop 'eKoXelro irpwrov
(Hesych. in voc), "A^a?- ^eo? (Philon Byb. ap.
Stephanos Byzant. in voc. AaoSUeca). So, 'Ati
appears in Atar-'ati = Gk. Atargatis (Antipatros of
Tarsos, ap. Athenaios, viii. 8). (A)targatis = Derketo,
and Antarata, a goddess of the Hittites. Prof. Sayce
suggests that Ate ' was the female deity answering to
the sun-god Atys or Attis' ; and observes that the
palladium of Troy was the ' meteoric stone ' of the
goddess, similar to the stone of the Hittite goddess of
Ephesos, whom the Greeks called Artemis, and whose
priestesses armed with the double-headed axe of Zeus
Labrandeus (' Of- the- twy- headed axe', = Dionysos
Pelekys), and Avith shield and bow, gave rise to the
Greek Amazon-myth (Yide Sayce, Herod, p. 430 ;
in Trans. Soc. Bib. Archaeol. vii. 260). He agrees
that the confusion between Ate or Athe and Athe-ne
merely arose from similarity of name. Here, then, is
another instance of a non- Aryan Athene. In Gen.
xxxvi. 2 we read of 'Adah the daughter of Elon the
^ Hitty,' /.e., Hittite; and in Gen. iv. 19 a wife of
Lamech is so called. Semitically the name is
explained as 'the Beauty.' Hesychios gives "ASa-
viTo Bal3vX(ovicov rj "Upa, and Prof. Sayce quotes the

1 62 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Apologjj of ]\Ielito to the effect that ' 'Ati was the
goddess of Adiabene, east of the Tigris.' Rer pejylos
or sacred robe reminds us of that of Kharmon-
Harmonia (Vide sup. p. 132), and of other Semitic
divinities, from whom it was ultimately adopted in
Athenian ritual.

Thus we see from such instances as Zeus Laphys-
tios, Labrandeus, Lykaios, Meilichios ; Hera Akraia;
Demeter Hippia, MeLaine ; Athene IHa, Onka ;
Apollon Tsmenios, Karneios ; Artemis Brauronia,
Ephesia, Eurynome, Kalliste, Limnatis, Patroa,
Kelkaia, Orthia, Taurike ; and many other similar
cases, — for these are merely a few specimens, — how
constantly the Greeks bestowed the name of one of
their own Hellenic and Aryan divinities upon some
foreign god or goddess. Until this principle is care-
fully and consistently taken into account, we shall
never arrive at a true understanding of Greek myth-
ology as a whole.

XXIV. The Greek Constellation-myths
We must next consider the Hellenic mythology in
its connexion v/ith the ancient constellation-figures,
bv which I mean those described in the Phainomena
of Aratos. And here, at the outset, I warn the
reader that the age of the Classicists, of whom
Otfried ^Miiller was the greatest, and Robert Lowe,
Viscount Sherbroke, perhaps the last, has passed for
ever. When Mr. Lowe, as Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, was asked to give Government aid to
excavations at Troy, he glibly replied, 'Etiam periere
ruinae.' People laughed, and said ' How smart ' !
Then came the spade of Schliemann, and Mr. Lowe's
resuscitation of Latin isfnorance seemed somewhat

Ill] THE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 63

silly. Sir G. C. Lewis wa.s another famous member
of this school. His Astronomy of the Ancients is an
excellent compendium of Classical quotations, but
other wise ratlier worse than worthless, ?>., mischievous ;
for, unfortunately for his fame, he lived long enough
to see and practically to reject the rapidly rising
sciences of Egyptology and Assyriology. About
these. Otfried Miiller of course knew nothing ; and
his labours will ever merit the deepest respect. It is
in no spirit of self-complacency that we speak of such
a man ; but, to quote a proverb which perchance may
be as old as the myth of the blinded Orion guided
by the dwarf Kedalion, who stands on his shoulders,
a subject treated in Phoenician art (Vide R. B. Jr.,
The Heavenl]} Displcuj^ Fig. xxxi. p. 39), ' A dwarf
on a giant's shoulders sees farther than the giant.'
The chief fault in the constellation studies of Miiller
is a vast abuse of the argument from silence, which
should always be regarded with vigilant suspicion ;
and an entire failure to perceive that when we try to
explain the origin of any particular constellation-
figure by saying that someone unknown, thought that
certain stars resembled e.//., an Arrow, and then
united them as a constellation called the Arvow^
which notion all the world accepted, we are merehj
inventing history^ and practically only repeatinrj that a
constellation called the Arrovj exists. Suppose this
theory were true in flxct ; even then we could never
laiow that it was true. In law a witness who swears
to facts which are true, but of which he is ignorant,
is liable to be proceeded against for perjury. And
this illustration will show the grave impropriety of
representing hypotheses as facts. If this theory of
the origin of the constellation -figures be further
tested by such an enquiry as^ Why were these

11 *

164 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

particular stars considered to represent an arrow, and
not a sceptre or a spear ? no answer can be supplied.
On such lines the greatest ignoramus is on a par with
the deepest student. It is as easy for the former as
for the latter to suggest that someone thought that
certain stars resembled a ram in shape, and lo ! the
constellation Aries was formed. Let the reader look
at Aries; or, to take a constellation more frequently
visible, the well-known W of Kassiepeia^ and he
will at once see that the stars of the one bear no
resemblance to a ram, nor the stars of the other to a
seated woman. Yet there was a reason for the
selection of these particular forms, a cause which can
only be discovered by careful research. I wish to
insist strongly on these principles ; especially since
the history of the constellation-figures has been a
happy hunting-ground for ignorance and folly. Scores
of books have been published upon this subject, most
of them in English, replete with almost every possible
historical and philological absurdity; whilst remark-
able for an entire ignorance respecting the real facts
of the case. It is, doubtless, difficult to overthrow
long established opinions, however baseless. But,
fortunately, errors do generally yield by degrees ;
and if not formally renounced, are yet tacitly
abandoned. Let us remember, then, on the threshold
of the enquiry, that, in forming constellation-figures,
man has his meaning, his reason, his particular line
of thought ; and was not merely influenced by an
arbitrary fancy. To give a fine illustration from
Prof. Ihering, quoted by Prof. Miiller : —

' What could seem more magical than the auguria
taken by an army on its march ? Why did they
throw grain before the fowls and watch their move-

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 65

ments ? Because originally, as Prof. Ihering has
shown, when entering into an unknown country, it
was often a question of life and death whether the
grain and berries that were found growing wild were
poisonous or wholesome' {C. p. 460).

This fact was ascertained by means of domestic
fowls, the original purpose was forgotten, the ancient
practice was retained, and became ' magical.'

Nor, again, are we here concerned with savages,
and what they think and do, or may have thought
and done in archaic times, Strabo (XVI. ii. 24)
sums up the unhesitating opinion of antiquity, in his
dictum that 'astronomy and arithmetic came to the
Hellenes from the Phoenicians'; and all modern
research does but illustrate this cardinal historical
fact. He says that the Phoenicians were led,
naturally enough, to study these sciences from their
commercial accounts and sailings by night. In The
Heaveyily Display I have shown at length that, in
Classical writers, the introducer or popularizer of
knowledge, is constantly described as its inventor.
Thus, according to Diogenes Laertios, Anaximandros
of Miletos, B.C. 610-547, 'was the first discoverer of
the gnomon'; whereas, as Herodotos (ii. 109) truly
says, ' The gnomon with the division of the day into
twelve parts, was received by the Hellenes from the
Babylonians.' The Greek constellation-myths are of
singular interest and importance, not merely because
they afford excellent studies in archaic psychology,
but also because they form an important link between
ourselves and that venerable Euphratean civilization
whence we have derived many of them, together with
our division of time into hours^ minutes and seconds.

1 66 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [

III

XXV. Palamedes

Ere speaking of the constellation-figures and their
attendant myths, we must notice the legend of a
great semi- Greek hero always connected with them.
The name of Nauplios ('Navigator') is naturally
attached to several personages in Greek mythico-
historic legend ; two of whom are confounded together
by Strabo (VIII. vi. 2), who also draws some erroneous
conclusions founded on his own mistake. Nauplios,
son of Poseidon, reputed founder of Nauplia (Pans.
TI. xxxviii. 2), the port of Argos, and called by some
the originator of the constellation Ursa Maj. (Theon,
in Arat. Pliainom. 27), is a representative of
Phoenician knowledge and colonization. Another
Nauplios, a similar personage, is styled king of
Euboia and sire of Palamedes, of whom he is thus
made to speak in a Fragment of the Nauplios of
Sophokles, wliich fortunately has been preserved : —

O^To? S'iipevpe rel-^o^ 'Apyetwv arparu)
araOfioiv, 'apiOjuwv /cat fiirpcov evpi]iiaTa'
K^a.Kelv^ erev^e irpwro^ ef kvo'=; heKa,
KiiK TwrSe y'avOti; evpe TrevreKovrdSa^;
et? %iXr ovTO^ eh o-rparoj (^pVKTwplav
VTTvov (j)v\d^eL^, e? O^eco ayfiavrpca
eScL^e K've<^r)vev ov SeSecy/jLeva-
€(j)€vpe S'aarpcov fierpa koI ireptoTpofjiar
ra^et^ re ravTa^, ovpdvia re ai^fiara,
vawv re iroipLavrrjpGLv ivOakaaaiwv
ApKTOv aTpo(f)d<; re kol Ku/^o? yjrv)(pdv hvaiv.

Here, in accordance with the statement of Strabo
{sup, p. 165), we find the arts of fortification, in
which the Phoenicians excelled; of numbers and
arithmetic, of military watch and ward, of navigation,
and of astronomy, including the dividing of the stars

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 67

into constellational groups and the naming of such
groups, ascribed to Palamccles, a grandson of the
Phoenician Poseidon (Eurip. Iph. en, AuL 198).
Homer is silent concerning the hero ; and for this
two reasons at once present themselves, (1) the death
of Palamedes occurred prior to the opening of the
Ih'ad; and (2) the poet 'sang for the glory of
Greece' (Gladstone, Juv. Mun. p. 145). Palamedes,
a personage in many points superior to the Hellenic
heroes, and, according to legend, infamously treated
by them, and particularly by the poet's favourite
Odysseus (Vide Hyginus, Fah. cv; Pans. X. xxxi. 1),
would naturally be somewhat avoided by a very
patriotic Hellene. Like his sire Nauplios, Palamedes,
as a representative of the historical Phoenician element
in Hellas, is in almost constant collision with the
Greek element, by which he is eventually overcome.
But, although Homer ignores him, Polygnotos, a
native of that Thasos which was so long a famous
Phoenician colony, did not. In his mighty picture
of the Under-world, perhaps the finest painting ever
executed, and which adorned the Lesche at Delphoi
(For a detailed account of it, vide R. B. Jr., Tellis and
Kleoheia), the Thasian master represented Palamedes
playing at dice, a sport which he was said to have
invented (Pans. XL xx. 3), with Salaminian Aias and
Thersitcs {Ih'uL X. xxxi. 1). And who and what is
Palamedes but the Phoenician Baal-Middoh (' Lord-
of- the- Measure;' cf. Palaimon = Baal-Hamon ; Belle-
roph6n=Baal-Piaphon, 'lediende lasante.' Berard.),
god of numbers, figures, weights, scales, dice, letters,
arithmetic, astronomy ; and the latter part of whose
name was understood as meaning 'the Wise' (Cf.
Medeia, ' the Wise '-woman). In Greek legend he is

l68 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

particularly connected with the invention of the letters
0, (j), X, and f (Yide Canon Is. Taylor, The Alphabet,
ii. 70). Another somewhat similar personage is
Agamedes (= Sem. ' The Great-measurer,' Gk. ' The
Yery-wise'), who represents Phoenician constructive
ability in Boiotia, and who forms with Trophonios
(=Ph. Baal Tropha, 'the Lord of Cure.' Berard.),
the Diad of god and god-introducer.

In the last line of the passage from the Nauplios^
Sophokles sums up the astronomical aspect of the
matter, by naming the Bear^ as protagonist of the
northern, and the Dog on behalf of the southern,
constellations ; and it will be observed that he speaks
not of Seirios^ generally merely the Dog-star, but of
Kiwn^tliQ, constellation, ^Yho%Q frigidum occasum on the
seventh day of Sagittarius^ accompanied by tempest,
had already been noted by the Athenian astronomer
Euktemon (Yide Geminos, Eisagoge eis ta Phainom.
Cap. xvi. Calendar), who about B.C. 432, together
with Meton, introduced the famous cycle of nineteen
3 ears, the iweaKalheKa Kv/cXa (^aeivov rjeXloLo (Aratos,
Diosemeia, 21), which had long before been known
to the Babylonians.

XXVI. The Ancient Greek Constellation-jagures

The ancient Greek Constellation-figures, as given
by Aratos, are : —

/. Northern Signs. These group themselves
thus : —

1. The Bears and Bearward (Yide sup. p. 65).
As Achilles Tatius {Eisagoge^ xxxix) truly says, the
Bears^ Serpent^ and Kepheus were not in the

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 69

Chaldaean sphere. In this the seven stars of the Great
Bear were called (Sum.-Ak.) Margidcla ('the Long-
chariot'), which ^ all the year is fixed' (leal sattt
Izzaz, W.A.L III. lii. No. 1, Rev. 1. 24), i.e., around
the pole. And this simple astronomical dictum is
expressed, or possibly even translated, by Homer,
when he says that it ^ turns round without moving
away' (//. xviii. 488). Thus, the Phrygians called
it KU\7]v ('the Circler.' Hesych. invoc). The Bear
was the Mediterranean, the Wain the Euphratean,
Liame of the constellation. Hence the two names
in Homer.

2. The Family-group. Kqjheus (Yide sup. p. 141),
Kassiepeia (= Kallone, ' the Beauty,' Souidas, in
[WG. Ph. Qassiu-peaer.), Andromeda (Yide sup.
p. 141) and Perseus (Yide sup. p. 141). ' The
jrreeks know that Perseus was the founder of
Myk^nai' (Pans. II. xv. 4), = Ph. Makhaneh ('the
Camp.' Berard. Cf. Mekone, Mukone, Migonion,
3tc.). The (southern) Whale is a detached member
)f this group. These constellations are Phoenician
n origin.

3. The Kneeler {=^HeraEes)^ constellationally
connected (1) with the Serpen^ the Ph. Ndkhdsch
mdmiui ('Old-serpent'), the r^epwv "Ocfyicov of the
Losmogony of the Phoenician-sprung Pherekydes of
^yros ; and (2) with the Arroiv and the three Birds,
lie Vulture ( the Lyre)^ the Bird (otherwise the
SuKui), and the Eagle. This group and myth is
Euphratean. Merodach-Gilgames (the Gilgamos of
\elian, xii. 21) wars against the three Demon-birds ;
jilgames in Euphratean art is pre-eminently the
uieeler, and, hence, in Yv^estern Hellas the constel-
ation is known as Engonasm^ whence the Lat.

I JO HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Nixus (Cicero), Genunixus (Ovid, Germanicus),
' Xixa genu species' (Manilius), lugenicuIatuH
(Vitruvius), Ingeniculus (FirmicusJ. This special
attitude links Herakles, the Kneeler, with Euphratean
art of the most archaic types and times : witness the
specimen from Mppur given by Hilprecht, The
Bahyloman Expedition of the Universitjj of Penn-
sylvania^ 189 G, Vol. i. Pt. ii. PI. xxvi : ' Man fighting
a lion.' The Babylonian cylinders show the kneeling
Gilgames in conflict with a lion, and the type con-
tinues from age to age, until we come to the fine
kneeling Phoenician Herakles of Thasos (Figured
by Svoronos, Sur la Signification ties Types Monetaires
des Anciens^ 1894, PI. xvi).

In Eastern Hellas the Kneeler continued to be
known as Herakles. Peisandros of Kameiros, cir.
B.C. 650, was author of the HeraMeia^ in which it
is said that the hero was first represented with club
and lion's skin, and his special labours fixed at
twelve in number. There is no invention in all this ;
Peisandros merely faithfully portrayed Gilgames-
Herakles, the Sun-god, who has a special labour in
each month and Sign of the Zodiac ; and Peisandros
himself merely copied from Pisinos of Lindos, as he
in turn received these stories from his predecessors.
The successor of Peisandros was Panyasis of Hali-
karnassos, put to death cir. B.C. 457, who also wrote
or re-edited a lleraMeia^ in fourteen books containing
9000 lines, and who called the Kneeler Herakles (Vide
Avienus, Aratea., 175).

4. The Charioteer (Poseidon)^ with his special
animals the Horse and Dolphin, placed side by side.

5. The Croion of Dionysos. ' Emere ac venderc
instituit Liber Pater. Idem diadema, regium insigne.

inj THE AIIYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL IJt

et triainplium inveiut ' (Pliny, Hist. Xat. vil. 57);
that is to say, the Sun-gocl established civilization,
and first triumphantly crowned heaven with his
glowing circle. Ariadne (' the Very-holy ' ), daughter
of Minos, to whom this Crown was given, probably
= Ph. Areth (Vide Bunsen, Egypt's Place^ iv. 246).

G. The Snake-holder. = the Ph. Eschmun, ' a
native Phoenician god,' as Damaskios {Isidarou Bios,
ccxlii) calls him, Aish-qel (' the Lively-fire '), a god
of healing, called by the Clreeks Epios (' the
Kindly '). Aishqel-l]pios = Gk. Asklepios, Lat.
Aesculapius, Aescolapeius, ultimately incorporated
into the family of Greek divinities as a son of
Apollo n ; figured as a Snake -holder on the Phoen-
ician coins of Kossura, and, with his sacred serpents,
specially revered at E[)idauros.

7. Deltoton. = The (isosceles) Triangle^ placed
with the Family-group of Phoenician divinities ;
and an exact celestial reproduction of the sacred
pyramidal monoliths, specimens of which still exist
in Kypros, and appear on her coinage. It further
serves as a symbol of that revered form the Tripod.

Such are the nineteen ancient Northern Signs.

11. Central Signs. Composed of : —

1. The twelve Signs of the Zodiac, known in the
Euphrates Valley from a remote antiquity. As
Prof. Sayce observes, the Virgin = Istar-'Asch-
thrirth-Astarte, called Astarte Erek-hayim ( == Gk.
Erykine, Erigone, Herkyna, etc.), i.e., Longae vitae
a?ic/or (Vide Berard, Ctdtcs Arcad. p. 148; R.B.Jr.,
The Zodiacal Virgo, ISSG). The idea of a goddess
at the same time virgin and mother is very archaic
(Cf. Pans. IL xxxvii. 2).

172 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

2. The Cluster ers ( = Pleiades)^ subsequently
called by play on words ^ Doves ' and ' Sailing '-stars,
often represented on coins by a Grape-cluster.

Early coins of Phaistos in Krete show Herakles
with Zzo?z-skin, at his foot Crah^ striking at Rijdra.
This group forms an interesting illustration of the
constellational position of Cancei\^ Leo^ and Hydra,

III. Southern Signs. These group themselves
thus : —

1. Or 1071., his Dogs and the Hare.^ a type of the
sun-chased Moon. (For instances of the Hare-moon
type, vide Gubernatis, Zoological Mytliology^ ii. 76 ;
Sebillot, Traditions de la Haute Bretagne ; Schlie-
mann, Troy and its Remains^ p. 136 ; Lajard, Cidte
de Mithra, PL lii. 6). The origin of this myth is
Euphratean ; Marduk (Maruduku probably = the
Ak, Uru-dug ; ' Benefactor of man ') the solar
hero, is attended by his ' four divine dogs,' Ukkumu
(' Despoiler '), Akkulu (' Devourer '), Iksuda (' Cap-
turer'), and Iltebu (' Carrier-away '). The number
is not accidental, but represents the flow of light
from the Diurnal-sun to the four quarters.

The gigantic (Cf. Pindar, IstL iii. 67 : (pvatv
' flap Lcove lav. Suii as huge compared with stars.)
Urion, Aorion, Oarion, Orion ( = Sem. Ury, ' the
Fiery-one,' a well known proper name, -\-dn. ' The
formation of proper names of men and places by the
termination on is excessively conmion.' Steinthal.
Cf Dag-6n, Shimsh-on.), who, in Phoenician Boio-
tia, which claimed to be his birthplace, was also
called Kandaon (Tzetzes, in Lykophron, 328),== Sem.
Kohain-dayan (' The Prince-the-Judge '), is a variant

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 73

phase of the solar Dionysos. The Winded (3rion
( = the solar eye quenched at night) recovers his
sight by journeying through the Under-world,
guided by the Kabeiric dwarf Kedalion ( = ' One in
charge ' — of the dead) ■^. Seirios, leader and brightest
of the stars, to the East ( = the reappearance of the
solar eye next day). Naturally Orion is loved by
Eos (the Dawn), and, gigantic though he be, he is
slain by Artemis (the Lunar-power, Od. v. 121-4) by
means of a still huger Scorpion (= Darkness. Vide
mf. p. 177). He dies in Pausteria (the 'Death'
mountain), in the West (Hesych. in voc. Pausteria),
Goodliest of men {Od. xi. 310), the Boiotian poetess
Korinna represented him as a noble and pious civilizer
of a barbarous country, a frequent role of the Sun-
god ; and he is reduplicated in the brightest of con-
stellations (For detailed consideration of the Orion-
myth, vide E. B. Jr., The Great Dionysiah Myth.,
ii. 270 et seq, ; Eridanus^ sec. iv; The Myth of
Kirhe^ p. 146 et seq.). The Dog is shown on a
Euphratean Boundary Stone (Vide R. B. Jr., The
Heavenly Display., Fig. Ixi., p. 78) in precisely the
same attitude as on a modern star-map.

The Lesser Dog^ Prohjon (' the Dog's-precursor'),
whose rising announced the coming of Sirius, is but
a single star, not a constellation, in Aratos. Prokyon
appears in an interesting legend which illutrates the
introduction of the Semitic constellation-figures into
Hellas. Dionysos, on arriving at Attike, was hospit-
ably received by Ikarios, to whom he gave the vine.
Some peasants who became intoxicated, thinking they
were poisoned, murdered Ikarios and buried his body,
which was at length found by his daughter Erigone,
who was conducted to the grave by his faithful little

174 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

dog Maira ('the Sparkler'). ErigoiR', from grief,
hung herself on the tree beneath which he was buried.
The god then punished the Athenians with madness,
in which condition the Athenian maidens hung
tliemselves. At length Dionysos, Ikarios, and
Erigone were propitiated by the institution of the
Festival of the Aiora (' Suspension in air,' Swinging) ;
and Ikarios was translated to the skies as Bootes,
Erigone as Virgo^ and Maira as Prohjnn. The legend
furnishes one of many instances of opposition to the
introduction of the Dionysiac ritual. Similar circum-
stances are described as occurring in Argolis, and two
familiar instances are those of Lykourgos (//. vi.
130-40) and Pentheus (Em'ip. Balchai), Ikaros or
Ikarios is identical with the Megarian hero Kar the
Karian, who is said to have built the Akropolis of
Megara, where were temples of Dionysos and Aphrodite
and a statue of Asklepios-Eschmmi (Pans. I. xl. 4).
The underlying historical fact is that the Karians were
constantly employed by the Phoenicians as mercen-
aries. I noticed {Siq). p. 171) that Erigone^- Sem,
Erek-hayim ; and the circumstance that Erigone and
Erigoneia ('the Early-born') were hidependent
Greek names for the Dawn, merely facilitated the
transliteration. The star a Can'is Minoris is called
by the Arabs Ghomdisd ('The Watery-eyed'), a
reminiscence how, in the myth, the ' canis ululans
^lera' (Hyginus, Fah, cxxx) wept for the death of its
master. The supposed fate of Erigone and the ritual
of the Aiora are connected with the cult of the crod-
dess of the net and chains (Vide p. 156).

2. The Stream. =^i\\(d Euphrates (Vide P. B. fh\.,
Eridanus^ River and Constellation).

3. The Sea-monster, Belongs to the Phoenician

TTl] THE ARYO-SEMTTIC SCHOOL 175

Famil}^ gi'O^^P) ^^cl is a reduplication of the
Euplirateaii Tiamat, HeL. Teliom (' the Deep '),
the Thanatth of Berosos ; the Tanthe of Damaskios,
and called in the inscriptions ' the Dragon of the Sea.'

4. The Southern Fish. A reduplication of the
zodiacal Fishes^ themselves originally one, a second
Fish havino^ been added for the double or intercalary
month Ye- Adar. All this watery part of the heavens,
into which falls the stream of Eridanos, and which is
occupied by the Sea-monster, the three Fish, the Sea-
(/oaf.) the Water-pourer^ the Dolphin., and XhQ Sea-horse
(Pegasos), who is represented as just emerging out of
it, was ' the region of Ea ' (Poseidon), in Eupln\atean
parlance.

5. The Altar. A reduplication of the UoJy-altar.,
the original seventh Sign of the Zodiac, superseded
by the Claics of the Scorpion^ which embraced it, and
which in turn gave way to the Egyptian Sign of the
Balance. Ta? Xt^X^?, ra? Ka\ovjieva<^ vir AlyviTTicov

Zvyov (Achilles Tatius), = Libra.

6. The Centaur. A reduplication of Sagittarius,
On a West Asian Gem (figured by me in Euphratean
Stellar BesearcJies., Pt. iv. p. 4) the Centaur and
Wild-beast (afterwards called Lupus) appear exactly
as Cheiron (' the Handy ' = skilful) is depicted on
the famous and archaic Chest of Kypselos (Yide
Pans. Y. xix. 2).

7. The Water-snake^ with the Boid and Crow.
The contest of Herakles and the Hydra is a reduplica-
tion of the Euphratean myth of the fight between
Marduk and Tiamat, the Dragon of chaos, darkness,
and evil, further reduplicated in the Sea-monster.
' The monstrous snake ' with its ' seven heads,' ' the
strong serpent of the sea' (W.A.I. II. xix. No. 2, 11.

176 HELLENIC MYTHOLOrxY [ill

7, 8), is a familiar figure in Eiiphratean myth. She
was the mother of a terrible brood, including man-
headed birds, raven-headed men, etc., representing
storm, tempest, etc. (For some myths connected with
the Bowl, vide Eridanus, p. 19).

8. The Ship, Called by the Greeks Argd {' the
Bright'). The great solar voyage across heaven
is an idea equally common to Akkadian, Semite,
Egyptian and Aryan. Mythic examples of it are the
voyage of Gilgames, who had a special ' ship ' or
' ark ' ; the voyage of Melqarth to the West; Apollon
Delphinios ; Helios and Herakles and the solar boat-
cup ; the voyage of Ra and his crew in the solar
barque; and, I may add, Arthur in the barge. That
there was also an actual British chieftain around
whom masses of solar myth clustered, I quite believe.

XXVII. The Signs of the Zodiac

I. Origin. The Signs of the Zodiac were not the
product of idle fancy or arbitrary invention; nor,
again, did they originate from a real or supposed
resemblance between their forms and the actual
configuration of the stars, although in several
instances, e,g.^ the Bull and the Scorpion, the actual
configuration was utilized in the expression of a
pre-existing concept. The Signs were, in truth,
reduplications of simpler ideas connected with
natural phenomena. For centuries astrologers,
without knowing why, have termed them alternately
' diurnal ' and ' nocturnal ' ; and this is quite correct,
inasmuch as they were in origin simply symbolical
representations, of a kind very familiar to the
mythological imagination, of certain ordinary diurnal

Ill] TPTE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 77

and nocturnal phenomena. They belong to a chass
of ideas which arose naturally and spontaneously
in the archaic mind, those anthropomorphic and
animal similes and comparisons which occur equally
in the Akkadian fli/mns, the Egyptian Book of the
Dead, or the R/)/-Veda. On careful analysis the
origin of the Twelve Signs appears thus : —

T. Diurnal Signs.

1. The Ram-sun, afterwards reduplicated as

Ai'ies.

2. Sun and Moon, afterwards reduplicated as

Gemini.

0. The Lion-sun, afterwards reduplicated as Leo.

4. The Daily-sacrificed Sun, afterwards redupli-
cated as Ara.

5. The Archer-sun, afterwards reduplicated as
Sagittarius.

G. The Rain-giving Sun, afterwards reduplicated
as Aquarius.

11. Nocturnal Signs.

1. The Moon-bull, afterwards reduplicated as
Taurus.

2. Darkness, afterwards reduplicated as Cancer.

3. The Moon-goddess (afterwards Evening-star),
afterwards reduplicated as Virgo.

4. Darkness, afterwards redupHcated as Scorpio.

5. The Sea-sun, afterwards reduplicated as Cajm-
cornus.

6. The Nocturnal-sun, afterwards reduplicated as

Fi'scis.

1/8 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

II. The Gllgames Epic. The archaic Euphratean
story of tlie solar hero Gilgames described a fresh
labour and adventure in each Sign and month, and
thus formed the prototype of the Herakles-myth.
From such fragments of the Tablets as remain we
can reconstruct the principal incidents as follows : —

1. Bam. Birth, parentage, etc., of Gilgames.

2. B'uU.^ Account of the mysterious, horned
Eabani (' Ea-made-me ').

3. Twins. Gilgames and Eabani.

4. Crah. Overthrow of the tyrant Khumbaba (Cf.
the name Kofil3d/3o<; Lucian, Peri tes Sy. The. xix).

5. Lion. The slaughter of the Lion.

6. Virgin. The Adventures of Istar.

7. AJtetr cind Cleacs. The descent to the Under-
world.

8. Scorpion. The Death of Eabani, and sickness
of Gilgames.

9. Archer. The Scorpion-men and the Bright
Grove.

10. Sea- Goat. The Voyage of Gilgames.

11. Water-pourer. The Story of the Deluge.

12. Fish. The Mourning for Eabani, the Rising
of his Ghost, etc.

Most of these instances are reproduced or appear
in variant phases of the subsequent myths of the solar
hero. Eabani, the Avise Man -beast, is reduplicated
in the good and wise Centaur- Cheiron.

III. The Siimero-Ahlcadian months. These, the
first of which corresponded with our March-April,
were called : —

1. Bara Ziggar, =' The Upright Altar '= (ab-

Ill] THE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 179

breviatecl form) ' The Altar,' or ^ Tho Sacrifice,'
/.e., of the Golden-ram -sun, offered daily ; basis
of the Phoenician ritual sacrifice of an only son,
and of the myth of the death of Tammuz, ' the
Only-son' (Vide sup. p. 148). So, in the Phoenician
myth, El-Kronos ' had an only son who was on that
account called ledoud (= Yehud, Heb. Yfdiid, ' the
Only-begotten'). When the country was placed, in
jeopardy during a great war, he decked his son in
royal apparel, erected an altar, and sacrificed him
thereon ' {Frag, ex Philonis De Jitdaeis Libro).

2. Gut'Sidi, = 't\iQ Directing Bull,' = ' the Bull,'
as, prior to B.C. 2540, the leading Sign.

3. Mun-ga., = ' the Making of Bricks,' = ' the
Brick,' or ' the Twins.' The archaic kosmogonic
myth or legend attached to the month, is that of
the Two Brethren, often hostile, and the Building
of the First City. Sun and Moon, constellationally
reduplicated in the two stars called by the Greeks
Kastor and Pohjdeuhes^ after the Aryan Di[id of the
A^'vinau-Dioskouroi.

4. Su-kulna^ = ' The Seizer-of-seed,' = ' the Boon '
(of Seed).

5. Ne-ne-gar^ = ' Fire-making-fire ' ' the Fire,
/.e., the fiery Leo.

6. Ki-Gingir-na.^ = ' The Errand of Istar,' = ' the
Errand.'

7. Tid-ku, = ' The Holy Altar,' = ' the Altar.'

8. Ajn'n-dua, = ' Opposite to the Foundation,'
= ' the Foundation.'

9. Gan-ganna., = ' the Very - cloudy,' = ' the
Cloud.'

10. AU)a-e, = 'T\\e Case- of-the-Piising' (of the
Sun), = ' the Cave.'

12 *

1 So HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

1 1. As-a-an^ = ' The Curse-of-rain,' = ' the Curse,'
or ' the Eainy/

12. Se-ktsil, = ' The Sowing of Seed ' = ' Seed.'

lY. The SumcTo- Akkadian Names of the Signs.

1. Lu-lim (' The Earn '). Also called Kii-e, = As.
Ar/f/aru (' the Messenger ').

2. Gut-anna (' The Bull-of-heaven ').

3. Mastahha-galgal (' The Great-twins ').

4. Nagar-asurra (' The Workman-of-the-Ri\ er-
bed '), = the Crab.

5. Lik-makh (' The Great-dog'), = the Lion.

6. Ah-nam (' The Proclaimer-of-rain ').

7. Bir (' The Light '), = the Altar, lighted.

8. Gir-anna (' The Scorpion-of-heaven '), com-
monly called Girtah (' Scorpion/ lit. ' Seizer-and-
stinger ').

9. Papilsak (' Winged-fire-head '), = the Archer.

10. Muna-kha (' The Goat-fish'), = Capricorn.

11. Gii-la ('The Urn' — of the Waterpoio^er).

12. Bur-ki ('The Place of the Cord'). Which
binds the Fishes.

V. The Bahglonio' Assyrian Names of the Signs.

1. Kusarikku ('The Eam').

2. Aljm ('The Buir).

3. Tudmu rahiiti (' The Great-twins ').

4. Pulukhu ('The Division'), i.e., the 'Colm-e'
(Gk. kolouros), the great circle passing through the
solstitial points. Practically this = the Crab, perhaps
called Sertdnu.

5. Aril ('The Lion').

G. Sh'u ('The Ear-of-corn). Spica (a Virginis).

Ill] THE AUYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL l8l

7. ZMnitu ('The Claws'). These held the
circular Altar {\\i\e R. B. Jr., li'emarh on the Euphra-
tean Astronomical Names of the Siyns of the Zodiac^
Sec. vii. Figs. 12-U).

8. Aqrahu ('The Scorpion').

9. Qastu ('The Bow').

10. 5a//^/ ('The Ibex').

11. Kd ('The Urn'), Ph. and Heb. ka-d, whence

(jrk. KuSo^.

11. Numc (' The Fishes'). The Ak dur = Bab.-
As. ri'ksu, ' cord,' and the Bihsu-Nuni (' Cord of the
Fishes') is 'the tail-connecting link' of Aratos
{Phainom. 245), the star a Piscium, called Nodus in
Cicero's Aratos, and now known as Ohda (Arab.
Uqdat, 'The Knot'), and i?/5c/m, a corrupt Arabic
form of the As. riksu.

In the Graeco- Babylonian period, subsequent to
Alexander, the Signs are technically known as : —

1. Ku. = Kusarikku (' Ram ').

2. Te or Te-te.=^ Ak. dimmena^ As. tnnmemt, ' foun-
dation-stone,' ' foundation.' The reference is to Tauras
asoriginally the iirstof the Signs. Timmenu isabraded
to thn, tern, te. The two starting-points (Te + Te)
are the Bidl and the Cluster, = the Pleiad.

3. Masov Mas-mas = Mastahha-(/ah/al.

4. Khas (' The Division '). Vide sup, I'ulukku.

5. A. = Aril ('Lion').

6. AT. = Shm ('Ear-of-corn').

7. Blr. ---= ' The Light' (Vide sup. p. 180).

8. Gir. — Girtah {' Scorpion ').

9. Pa. = Papilsak (Vide sup. p. 180).

10. Sah.=Sahu{'lhex').

11. Gu.= Gida^Vvu').

l82 HELLENIC MYTHOLOrxY [ill

^ 12. Zih ('The Boundary '), i.e., the end of the

Signs.

YI. The Phoenician Names of the Signs. Philon
of Byblos translated the work of Sanchouniathon
On the Phoenician Letters^ and, in a passage on the
nature of the Serpent, preserved in Eusebios {Prop.
Euan. i. 10), he says, Ecpyrac 8e lyxlv irepl avTOv ev
roU eTTiypacpofievoL^ irepl 'E^oydtcov. As Lenormant

observes, ' Les 'eOcodia sont manifestement les signes
celestes, ctkuth, hebr. othoth ' (Les Origines, i. 552).
The Phoenician treatises on the constellation-figures
are unfortunately lost ; but patient research will
enable us to reconstruct the Phoenician sphere. The
Signs were :

1. Telelt (' The Tamb'). A word applied to any
young creature (Cf. Aramaic Talitha).

2. Aleph (^The Bull' or Bull's head'). So

Hesychios : "A\(f)a' /3oo9 Kecj^aXi]. ^olvlke^.

o. Thomim (' The Twins ').

4. Sertdn ('The Crab').

5. Laijish. ('The Lion'). Whence the Kretan
A/9 (Hesychios).

6. 'Aschthdrth (Astartc), and perhaps BethiduU
(' Virgin').

7. Perosnth? ('Claws').

8. Aqrab (' The Scorpion ').

9. Qesheth ('The Bow').

10. Gedg ('The Kid').

11. Delg ('The Bucket').

12. Daghn (' The Fishes ').

The Pleiades are named Heb. and Ph. Ivimah, Bab.
Kimtu ('the Family'). The Signs collectively arc

Ill] THE ARYO-SE.MITIC SCHOOL 1 83

called Sum.-Ak. Inmin ('the Watches'), r>al).-As.
Mazarati, Heb.-Ph. Mazzarnth, LXX. Ma^ovp^O, the
night-watches bemg marked by the transit of the
constellations.

VII. The Si(/)is in India. After the age of Alex-
ander the Hindus became ac(|uainte(l with the Signs.
The Greek forms KriuH, Tauros^ JJidymoi, Kolouros
(Vide sup. p. 180), Leon, Partheiios, Ziujon ('the
Yoke '), Slvrpios, Toxotcs, Aij/okeros, Ilydrochoos^'cmd
Ichthijes, reappear in Hindu astronomy as Kriya,
Tdvun, Jltuma, Kidlra, Leya, IVithona, Jiika,
Kaurpya., Taul'shika, Ahokera, Hrldivija, and Ittlia,
Similarly, the planets Hermes, Ares, Kronos, Zeus,
and Aphrodite, reappear as Himna, Ara, Komi, Jyau,
and Asphujit, Helios becoming Heli. The extra-
zodiacal constellations reappear in the same way, c.(/.,
Kcissiepeia becomes Kctsyapi, Andromeda, Antarmada,
etc. When the Sk. forms of these names were first
met with, it was (not altogether unnaturally) supposed
that India had possessed the Signs from time im-
memorial, and had bestowed them on the West.

VIIF. The Siyns in J'^yypt. The Greeks also intro-
duc( d the Signs into Egypt, where they appear in
the well-known Zodiacs of Esiieli and Denderah, etc.,
which were formerly supposed to be of an immense
antiquity.

The notion, at one time prevalent, that the Signs
were only introduced into Hellas at a comparatively
late period, is as baseless as the theory that Alex-
andrian grammarians and poets tacked astronomical
myths on to this or that personage at their own sweet
will. Such plodding souls as the author of the
Kcifasterismoi, Hyginus and ethers never dreamed

184 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

of taking any liberties of the kind ; but they had
before them numerous authors now unfortunately
lost, and the loss of this mass of evidence has made
these delusions possible. Had we only the works of
such writers as Peisandros, Pisinos, Panyasis, Aga-
osthenes of Naxos, wdiose history of that island was
used by Aratos, etc., the task of tracing the history
of the introduction of the Signs into Hellas would
have been far easier. But, whilst refined common
sense will assure us that the Phoenician sailors would
bring their lore with them as w^ell as their letters,
we are not left to this inference, certain as it is. We
find archaic Sign-myths connected with Phoenician
personages. The Bam with Athamas ; the Bull,
Crah^ Hydra, Bion, Love-goddess {Virgin), etc., with
Herakles ; the Scorpion with Orion, the Goats {Ai.T
and Aigokeros) with Krete ; the Fishes wdth Derketo,
and thus on. Aia: ( = Capella, a Aiirigae) is
called 'AfxaXOeia, = Sem. L'Amma-i9e/a (' To the
Divine-mother'), and the ' Olenian ' Goat, because
carried on the 'arm' (oiXevq, vlna), as indeed it
appears in countless instances on the Monuments of
Babylonia. But, without further enlarging upon
these matters here, I trust that the foregoing brief
presentation of facts, many of which are by no means
readily accessible, will enable the reader to grasp
clearly the general historical progress of the Signs
of the Zodiac.

XXVIII. The Homeric Constellations

'Homer, avIio is most accurate in every thhig'
(Athen. V. (j), refei-s by name to the Bear^ Plough'
man^ Clusterers, Rainy-ones (Ilyades), Bog, and

Hi] THE ARYO-SKMITIC SCHOOL 1 85

Or /ON. He refers generally to ' all the Signs {reipea)
with which the heaven is crowned.' The sugges-
tions that this line is spurious, are baseless, lie
also observes that the Bear alone (/•<'., of those con-
stellations which he mentions) does not dip in ocean.
Strabo, stumbling very needlessly over this simple
statement, understands Homer to assert that the Bear
was the only constellation in the sky which does
not dip. If a great man makes a mistake, he is
generally eagerly followed ; and so all the world have
blindly accepted Strabo's blunder. Homer is not
writing a l^liabiomena ; he names the Bear^ as head
of the northern Signs ; Oru/n^ as head of the
southern ; and Pleiads and Hyads, as representing
the Zodiac. Incidentally he refers to the Dog and
to Bootes^ ' that setteth after a long time/ or ' at
length' (Od. v. 272). This latter invaluable refer-
ence shows that Homer alluded to the constellation
as it is mapped at present ; he was not referring to
the star Arktonros (Tide Lewis, Astron. of the
Ands. p. 59 ; W. W. Merry, Odysseif, i. 282). This
also was quite understood by the ancients (Yide
Aratos, Plialnom. 579-85, and Schol.) ; and, like
other Homeric statements, was carefully imitated
down to the end of the Classical period. The
supporters of the argument from silence, those who
hold that Homer did not know of this or that
Aratean constellation, have never really thought out
the matter. Anyone who had once marked on the
sky as groups the seven IFaz*;^- stars, Bootes^ Pleiads,
Hyads, and Orion, would not stop there; he would
form other combinations also. The only one of the
five planets named by Homer is Hesper-Fliospher.
Will it be contended that he was ignorant of the

1 86 HELLEXIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

other four ? Tf there can be anyone 'svho thhiks so,
let him re-read that superb description of the ch^ud-
less starry heaven which closes //. viii., and of which
Tennyson has given such a matchless rendering, a
night when ' the immeasurable heavens break open
to their highest,' and when ' all stars are seen ' ; and
then let him recant so grievous a heresy. But, if
the bard, whilst well wotting Jupiter^ or Mars^ or
Saturn^ did not choose to name them, although he
might readily have done so, is it strange that he is
silent concerning the Bam and his fellows, when
there was no reason in the story to refer to them ?
Mark the account of Odysseus sailing by night, — for
stars are sent by Zeus as portents for mariners
(//. iv. 75-6), a thoroughly Phoenician opinion, —
how he views Pleiads, Ploughman, and Jkar^ keeping
the latter on his left (for Greek-like, lie steered by
the Great Bear)^ and watches Orion. Did he see
nou2:ht but these ? Above him blazed the Lion ; in
front were the Ticins with Prohjon on their left and
the Goat {Alx) on their right. He noticed Oruju on
the horizon at his right front; and, as he viewed the
Pleiads, he would of necessity behold all these far
more conspicuous stars, as well as the Hyads, which,
as the poet mentions them elsewhere, it will
probably be admitted that he saw. But, possibly
some one will suggest that these other constellations
were not named yet ? ' No more of that.' Aix-
CapelJa was known as (Sum.) AsJ^ar ('the Goat')
in the Euphrates Valley at least a couple of thousand
years earlier ; and Lion and Twins were then grey
with age. But I will not pursue the subject further
here.

In Homer the .Do</ (of Orion), whether also a con-

Ill] THE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 87

stellation or not, is certainly a single star, Seirlos, in
wliose name Aryan and Semitic derivations coalesce.
On the Aryan side he is ' the ScorrJier ' (as connected
with aelpo^, etc.) ; on the Semitic, he is ' the Burning-
one,' ' Lamp,' etc. (as connected with the Ar. .s/>^//,
etc.), Sinus and Procyon being, as Prof. Hommel
has shoAvn, 'the two Si'ray.' In W.A.I., VI. vi. 19,
where the Ak. name is lost, we have the As.
equivalent Kalbu Samas (' Dog-of-the-Sun ') ; and in
IV.A.L, II. xlix. 63, we find the Kakkab Lih-Udu,
The As. kahhahu, Heh. kdklmhh is used both for
' star ' and ' constellation ' ; and therefore we have to
decide in every case by the context. We may read
either ' Star ' or ' Constellation of the Dog of the
Sun ' ( Ak. Lik- Udu.). As a stellar Dog often appears
with other constellation-figures on the Euphratean
Boundary-stones (Vide sup. p. 173), I strongly incline
to the opinion that the Homeric Kudu is also a con-
stellation ; just as in the case of the Eagle .^ alike in
Akkadian and in Greek, wdiich repeats the Akkadian
terminology, we have the same name {Eagle) applied
both to the constellation and to its principal star
(Vide inf. p. 191)).

It is noticeable that nearly the whole of the
personages and objects which make up the con-
stellation-figures, are to be found in Homer. He
does not mention Kcpheus^ but, according to
Athenaios (xiv. 32), he knew the name Kassiepeia^
and wrote {11. viii. 305) : —

KaX^ Ka(7aL67r€La Oeoh Se/xa? eoLKvla.

And he introduces Eurynome {Ih. xviii. 399), who is
merely a phase of Kassicpeia herself. Perseus is
'most famous of all men' {lb. xiv. 320), whilst

l88 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

the Gorgon head appears alike on the aiyis of Athene
and on the shield of Agamemnon. It is certain,
therefore, that the poet knew the story of Andro-
meda; and he speaks of 'the Sea- monster ' {Ketos,
lb. XX. 147) against which Herakles, a variant
phase of Perseus, fought, and says that Amphitrite
had 'many such' {Od. v. 421-2). Cheiron (the
Centaur), Asklepios (the Snake -holder), Ganym^des
(often considered to be the Water- or IVme-jjourer) ;
Atlas (= Ph. Atel, 'the Darkness,' sire of stars),
the heaven-supporter ; Orton^ Herakles with Bow
and Arrow; the ship Argu, the beautiful Sidonian
MLving-howl {Kreter, 11, xxiii. 741); the Dolphin^
as a kind of king of fish [Ih. xxi. 22); the Water-
make {lb. ii. 723), the Lion and Bull {lb. xvii. 542);
the Eayle and Hare {lb. 674-8); the Eagle and Swan
{lb. XV. 690-2) ; the Bear, the Dog, the Twins
(Kastor and Polydeukes), are all familiar Homeric
figures. As of course, the poems speak of serpents,
horses, charioteers, archers, wreaths, lyres, birds,
rams, goats, virgins, doves, fishes, streams, altars and
tripoils. They do not, I think, mention crabs (which,
however, appear in the Batrachomyomaclmi), crows,
or scorpions.

Margidda (' the Wain.' A^ide swp. p. 169) was, in
the Euphratean scheme, specially connected with the
god Mul-lil (Vide sup. p. 154); and, in this aspect,
was called (Ak.) Wid-mo-sarra (' The Lord-the-
Yoice-of- the- Firmament '), and, as a nocturnal mani-
festation of Mul-lil, (As.) Bilu zaJdd mati Q The Lord-
of-the-Ghost-world.' W.A.I. II. xlviii. 56). This
description is especially interesting, as it enables us
to see how thoroughly Euphratean in origin are
many of the Iranian stellar fancies and beliefs.

in] THE ARYO-SRMITIC SCHOOL I 89

In the Iranian scheme, Ilaptoiringa^ ' the Seven-
enthroncd-ones ' (= the Wafii)^ the leader of the
northern stars, is 'entrusted with the gate and
passage of hell, to keep back those of the myriad
demons, and demonesses, and fairies (Pairikas) and
sorcerers (Yatus) who are in opposition to the
celestial sphere and constellations' {Miiiokhired^ xlix.
15, ap. West). This is merely an expansion and
intensification of Jfaiyidda^ ruler of the ghosts.
Manjidda is translated by the Kretan "K'yavva' a^a^a
. . . Kal 7] iv ovpav(p"KpKTo^ (Hesychios).

Judging by analogy, the Ak. name of the Lesser
Bear would be ^Marturra ('the Little-chariot'),
Bab. -As. Ruhihu (/the Chariot'), Heb. Belcher.
Its seven stars are a smaller copy of those of the
Greater Bear^ and the star at the end of the tail
(a Ursae Min.) is called Alrucaba ('the Chariot') in
the Alphonsine Tables. Tem. B.C. 1300,^ Ursae Min. ^
called T] ^oivLKY) ('the Phoenician -star), and now
(Ar.) Ivaukah {'The Star '), had succeeded a Dracoms
as Pole-star. Thales, a man 'of the family of the
Thelidai, who are Phoenicians by descent, among
the most noble of all the descendants of Kadmos,
as Platon testifies' (Diog. Laert. Thales^ i), did
not indeed ' discover ' the Lesser Bear, but induced
the Greeks to sail by it (Vide Schol. //. xviii. 487 ;
Aratos, Phainom. 37-44; Kallimachos, Frag. xciv).
There is not the least reason to suppose that Homer
was not acquainted with the T^esser Bear; but we
may feel sure he would never have spoken of it with
the grandiloquent inappropriateness of Euripides,
' Twin Bears with the swift wandering rushes of their
tails, guard the Atlanteian pole' (Petrithoos, Frag.iii).
On the contrary the motion of the Bears is slow and

190 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

solemn, so that they have been called the Biers^ and
they are by no means ' twms.' Yet the quotation
well illustrates the nurturing character of the Ursa
Matronalis ; and, with a passage to the like effect
from Mr. Ruskin, I will conchide. Describing the
sculptures of ' the Tower of Giotto ' at Florence, he
says :—

' The next sculpture is of Eve spinning and Adam
hewing the ground into clods. . . Above them are
an oak and an apple-tree. Into the apple-tree a
little bear is trying to climb. . . The figure of the
bear is again represented by Jacopo della Querela, on
the north door of the Cathedral of Florence. I am
not sure of its complete meaning ' (^Mornings in
Florence, 4th edit. 1<S94, pp. 159-60).

The Bear trying to get the fatal apple is thus
connected with Eve, Universal Mother, the great
Ursa Matronalis. The animal appears on the coins
of Hadrianothera and Mantirieia.

XXIX. The ConsteHation-fig'ures as Coin-types

The last remark naturally leads us to notice that
alike on the coinage of Phoenicia, Lydia, Lykia,
Etruria and Hellas the constellation-figures appear
as coin-types; and that not here or there merely,
but all over the shores of the ^Mediterranean. Xor
is it a few of them that are found in this connexion ;
for there is not one which is entirely absent. After
making every allowance for special local circum-
stances, play on words, etc., the fact shows how well
known and respected the various Signs were from a

in] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL I9I

very early period. As I intend to treat of this
subject at length elsewhere, I shall here only take a
single city, Kyzikos in Mysia, as a specimen ; and
I think the reader will probably be surprised at the
result. Kyzikos, connected by colonization with
Miletos, which latter place is said to have been
founded by Kretans, stood upon the ' Island of the
Bears ^ ("ApfCTcov vrjo-o^)^ a name not without a con-
stellational connexion (Vide sujj, p. 64) ; and
possessed a coinage commencing in the seventh
century B.C. Amongst its coin-types are : —

Bowl. Bakchic l-antharos, = Kretcr.

Bucranium. Filleted. The Phoenician Aleph (Vide
sup. p. 182).

Bull. Stepping to r., walking, butting, kneeling,
winged. This coin gave rise to the proverbial saying
on purchased silence, l3ov^ eVl 7X^0-0-6 /Se^rjKev (Cf.
Aischylos, Ag. 36).

Charioteer. Erichthonios, presented to Athena.

Crah. Holding head of Fish in claws.

Dog. Statanty r. fore-paw raised.

Dog. Twy-headed, statant^ with tail ending in head
of Serpent. A very curious and interesting figure.
The Twy-headed-dog with serpentine body appears
on the Euphratean Boundary-stones (Yide R. B. Jr.,
The Heavenly Displag, Fig. Ixiv.), and was a symbol
of Tu or Tutu, the Death-god. Mr. W. Wroth
wrongly calls this Dog Kerberos.

Dolphin. Bearing youthful male figure (Mehkertes-
Palaimon. Cf. Pans. II. i. 7).

On r. hand of Poseidon.

Eagle. Head of, with Tunny in beak.

Fish. The protagonistic type of the place is the

192

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [lH

Tunny; and we find from Schol. Arat. Phainom,
242, that the Northern of the two zodiacal Fish
'XaXBaloL Kokovaiv'lx^^v ^eXi'^ovLav. Ihe theiidonias
was a kind of tunny. I do not suggest (and this
principle holds good in many similar instances that
the people of Kyzikos stamped their coins with a
tunny merely because they knew it as a zodiacal
Sign. But their fishing industry harmonized in the
matter with their const(?llational knowledge ; and
both jointly contributed to this particular selection of
type, of which the coins show many variants, e.g. : —
Naked male figure with body ending in fish's tail,
= Ea-Dagon-Poseidon (Vide sup. p. 128) ; beneath,
Tunny. Ea (' Water-house ') = the 'A09 of Damaskios,
the '11^9 of Helladios, the 'D^dwr]^ of Berosos, ex-
plained by Lenormant as Ea-x(f^n ('Ea-the-Fish'),
and by Lacouperie as if from a reading A-e-anu^
viz., Anu-Ea ('the god Ea') read reversely (Cf.
Khasis-adra and Adra-khasis^ etc.). I may remark
that certain Greek transliterations represent Semitic
names read backwards way on. This, of course,
arises from the fact that Semitic is read from r. to 1.,
Greek from 1. to r. The Ak. god-name Da-yan
means 'the Exalted-one' (Ak. da^ ' summit,' +/a//?,
^the participle of the substantive verb.' Sayce.).
Various Semitic etymologies were subsequently
attached to the word, e.g.^ ddyan^ 'corn' (Sanchou.
i. 5) and dag^ 'fish.' The cult of the primeval
Fish-god of Lower Babylonia passed westward to the
Phoenician seaboard ; aud thence to Hellas, island
and continental. The Tunny is specially connected
in art with Poseidon (Vide Athen. viii. 36). And in
illustration of the fact that the zodiacal Pisces were
tunnies, we find, in the Ducal Palace at Venice,

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIG SCHOOL 1 93

Jupiter ' represented in liis houses Sagittarius and
Pisces . . . raises his sceptre in his left hand over
Sagittarius, represented as the centaur Chiron,
[ = Eabani, sup. p. 178] ; and holds two tunnies in
his right' (Ruskin, Stones of Venice^ ii. 358).

Winged female figure, holding Tunny in r. hand.
As figures of the archaic Poseidon are often incor-
rectly described as ^ Triton,' ' Glaukos,' etc., so
figures such as this, in default of anything else, are
frequently called 'Nike.' It is more probably a type
derived from the Phoenician Adamath — Andromeda ^
Avhich celestially is next to the Tunny.

Goat. Head of.

Herakles. Bearded ( = the Gilgames-type), naked,
kneeling on one knee ( = Engonasin), with Cluh^
Bow^ and two Arrows.

• Wearing Z/o/i-skin, strangling Lion., etc.

Horse. ' Pegasus ' ( = Sem. Tegah^ ' bridle.'
Berard. I.e., the Horse caught and bridled), with
pointed wing, flying r. Pegasos appears on a Hittite
seal.

Lion. With Herakles; scalp of, affrontc, etc.

Pam. Statant, kneeling.

Scorpion. In small incuse square.

Tripod. Cf. Deltdton {Sup. p. 171).

We also find Apollun with Lyre, Dionysos, and
Harmodios and Aristogeiton, who are certainly
excellent representatives of the Twins. A Satyr,
pouring Avine from a jar into a kanthar, cannot be
considered as a symbol oi Aquarius ; but, with this
exception, every Sign of the Zodiac, as well as many
other constellation-figures are practically represented
on the coins of this single city.

194 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

AVe find together, alike on coins and in the sky,
HeraUes and the Arrow ; Heraldes and the Serpent;
Eagle and Dolphin; Pegasos and Fish ; Snake-holder
and Snake; two Fishes; Lion (-skin). Water-snake,
and Crab, etc. This immense use of the consteUation-
figures is the result neither of accident nor of caprice.
It points to a i-ecognition of astronomy as nothing
less than a phase of religion.

XXX. Harekhal and the Stymphalian Birds

Ere leaving the subject of Greek constellation-
m}ths, let us notice one of them in some detail.
The Aryanistic mythologist, when speaking of the
labours of Herakles, observes : —

' The Stymphalides or birds of the lake near
Stymplijilos in Arkadia are called the offspring of
Ares. Their destruction by Herakles seems to have
had a purely local origin' {C. p. 620).

In other words, he is quite unable even to suo-o-est
any explanation of the legend. The totemistic
mythologist— Bat we must not expect explanations
from him. Mr. Farnell innocently remarks, * Arcadia
lies remote from Oriental influences ' ( Cults, ii. 430).
On the contrary, as M. Berard has shown, in very
great detail, it Avas at one time almost a mass of
Phoenician ideas and cult; and it is the scene of
many of the doings of Harekhal (' Jlie Traveller,' vide
sup. p. 99), so often assisted by his faithful hench-
man lolaos ( = Ph. lol, ' contractum ex lubal, lual,
splendor Baalis.' Gesenius. Cf. the Phoenician
settlement at lol-kos in S. Thessaly, near 'the
Athamantic field,' vide s?fp. p. 1 16), and attended by

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 1 95

various Arkadians. In illustration of the hero's
name, we hud, in the Etijmol. Marj. in voc. Fa^etpa
( = Ph. Gadir^ ' an enclosure,' Gk. ra TdSecpa, Lat.
Gades, Span. Cadiz.), a place near the Pillars of
Herakles and said to have been founded by him, and
which contained flimous temples of Herakles and
Kronos, . . . o)? cprjal KXavBLO<; 'louXto? eV rat? ^ouhk7]<;
IcTTOpiat^, OTL 'Kpxci^^y^ ^''o? ^olvlko^ KTLaa<; ttoXlv,
aypSfjiaae rfj <i>oLvlK(ov ypacjifj. This writer, of unknown
date, the author of the Phoinikika^ was named, not
'Julius,' but 'lolaos.'

The Stymphalian Bird-legend is as follows : — A
flock of demon-, human-flesh-eating, man-slaying
Birds, daughters of Stymphalos and Ornis, and
nourished by Ares, had fled from some Wolves to the
Stymphalian Lake. Eurystheus having ordered
Herakles to expel them, he either slew them with his
arrows, or drove them away. They were subse-
quently found by the Argonauts in the island of
Aretias (' the Unblest '). Such, briefly, is the dream.
What is the interpretation ?

The progress of the Phoenicians northwards from
their station at Kythera (Vide sup. p. 131) has been
very ably illustrated by ]\I. Berard, and can be
followed in Pausanias by him who reads that author
with understanding. On the Lakonian coast lay
Side ( = Tsidun, %iho)i^ and Helos, founded by
Helios, son of Perseus, z.e., the Phoenician Sun-god.
In the Eurotas Yalley was the ancient town of Amy-
klai (//. ii. 584), whose mythic founder Amyklas =
the Kypriot and Ph. Kesheph (' the Thunder-bolt ') —
Mikal, the celestial Are ; and whose son, the beautiful
Hyakinthos ( = Adonis), slain in his youth, was there
honoured at the great festival of the Hyakinthia.

196 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

Passinor northwards we reacli the Phoenician fortress
of Lykosoura, 'oldest of towns' (Pans. VIII.
xxxviii. 1), and the dread sanctuary of Zeus Lykaios
with his human-sacrifice cult [lb. YIII. ii. 1 ; xxxviii.
5); near which is Phigaleia ( ^ Sem. Phega,
'fortune/ + El, 'the Fortune of EL' Cf. Pagiel), a
famous centre of non- Aryan divinities (Vide sup.
p. 41) and of magical and necromantic rites {11. III.
xvii. 8), and said to have been founded by a
chikl of Lykaon (Hesych. in voc). Crossing the
Alphaios ('the Bull' river), and noting such
names as Makaria( = the town of Melqarth), and
Orchomenos, which also occurs as a place-name in
Boiotia, we arrive at Stymphalos. The exploits of
Herakles were commemorated in this Arkadian
region. On the wall of the temple of the Semitic
goddess, whose name was rendered by Despoina
(' the Mistress '), at Akakesion, was represented that
great exploit of the Semitic hero, the robbing the
Aryan ApoUon of his Tripod (Vide sup. p. 97). And
the contest between the two divinities is further
illustrated by the legend that the Lakonian Aris-
todemos was shot with arrows by Apollon, because he
had consulted Herakles, instead of going to the oracle
of the god (Pans. III. i. 5). As the Phoenician
influence passed over into Elis, we hear of a dread
contest between Herakles and the Aryan Aidoneus at
Pylos (IL v. 398-402 ; Pans. Vj". xxv. 3), />.,
primarily the ' Gate ' of the Under-world, forced by
tiie conquering Sun-god. In Lakonike Harekhal-
Archaleus also appears as Argalos, eklest son of
Amyklas (Pans. III. i. 3).

' Stymphrdos, the founder of the town, was the
third in descent from Arkas the son of Kallistn '

Ill] thp: aryo-semitic school 197

{Ih. YIII. xxii. 1) ; and the three generations of the
mythic pedigree afford some indication of the time
which it took the Phoenicians to penetrate to this
locality. The name is very interesting. I'hus, we find
' Stemhal, fiHus Masinissae Polyb. 37, o, ubi editum
est XT€fjL/3auou (lege Xrefi/SaXov), Contractum est ex
MastanahaV (Gesen. Script. Ling. Ph. p. 414),
' prob. clypens Raalis' (/<^. 410),= the peculiar Boiotian
Buckler of Herakles, Lat. ch/peiis, always found on the
Boiotian coinage. Stemhalos = StjjmpJialos. Near this
very ancient town (Cf. //. ii. 608), then, clearly of
Phoenician foundation, is located the scene of the
contest between Herakles and the Demon-birds. On
a Florentine (J-em, generally figured in illustrations of
the twelve labours of Herakles, he is shown, kneeling
on one knee (the attitude of Gi\gdimQ^- Engonasin)^
about to discharge an arrow at the three Birds, who
are advancing in a line against him. Says Pau-
sanias : — ' Concerning the Stymphalos river there is
a tradition that once man-eating birds lived there;
and these birds Herakles is said to have killed with
his arrows. But Peisandros of Kameiros (Vide sup.
p. 170) says that Herakles did not kill the birds, but
only scared them away with rattles ' (VIIT. xxii. 4).
He adds that there were similar birds in Arabia; and
that the birds were represented on the roof of the
ancient temple of Stymphalian Artemis. The coin-
types of the place are Herakles in Lion-skin ; Same,
striking with Club, holding Lion-skin and Bow ;
Same, with strung bow and quiver ; Head and neck
of crested Bird ; and Head of Artemis. We observe
that Peisandros, an early Eastern Hellene, was familiar
Avith the story, and knew a special variant of it.
Xow this great ex|)loit of Havekhal-Herakles is

198 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

grandly commemorated in the Phoenician celestial
sphere, which is also our own. There Herakles-
Engonasin.f kneeling, shoots an Arroiv (^the con-
stellation Oistos-Sarjitta) against the three Bird-constel-
lations, the Eagle, the Vuliure (also called the Lyre)^
and the Bird (Ornis)^ otherwise called the Sicaii
(Kyknos, another personage killed in battle by
Hcrakles). Now we see how it was that the concept
of the constellation the Arrow arose ( Yide sup. p. 163),
and why it was not imagined as a sceptre or a lance,
and why its point is turned from Herakles and
towards the Birds. Now we see, when Otfried Miiller
said there was ' nothing mythological ' about the
Arroiv, and that it was so named from its ' figure,'
how profoundly ignorant he was respecting the origin
of this, as of many other, constellations. How silly
now appears the idle notion that someone looked at
these particular stars, and thought, independently of
any further or other idea, that they resembled an
arrow. Their real resemblance to an arrow was thus
utilized in recording the contest of Herakles and the
Birds. ' Steel-blue Vega, the zenith -queen of the
heavenly Lyre,' as I say elscAvhere, is called Al-JVesr-
al-Wdki (Yide IJlugh Beigh's Star Catahgue in voc),
Vuliur cadcns., 'the Falling Grype,' and the Wega
of the AlpJwnsme Tables. According to an Arab
commentator on Ulugh Beigh, the stars e and f Lyrae
represent the tAvo Avings of the ' Grype,' by drawing
in Avhich he lets himself swiftly down to the earth.
And this Phoenician myth of Harekhal and the Birds
is but a reduplication of the original Euphratean
myth, according to which Marduk-Merodach, Avith
whom Gilgames, as a solar hero, is identical, fights
with and overcomes three Demon-birds, as shoAvn on

Ill] THE ARYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 199

the CyUndcrs (Vide Lajnrd, Calte de Mlthra, PL Ixi.
Fig. 7), or contends with his arrows against a single
Bird {Ibitl PL liv. B. 11), Sometimes a god is
portrayed standing between two Ostriches, holding
each by the neck (Cidlimure, Oriental Cylinders
No. xl), i.e., restraining the nmuly powers of
nature. For the Birds of Stymphalos are the raging
Storm-birds (Vide snp. p, 17()), hostile to, and over-
come by, the warrior Snn-god Merolach-Gilgames-
Harekhal. I may add that the star we call the
Ear/Ie, i.e., Altair {= \\\ Al-Tair^ 'the Bird,' a
Aquilae\ is so named l)ecause it was the Idkhu or
Eri(ju. (' Powerful-bird,' i.e., EaijJe) of the Euphratean
sphere ; whilst the Vulture was the Euphratean
star RaditartdJm (' The-Snatching-swoo])ing-tearing-
bird') or Liimmergeier. Tartakhn, Heb. Tartak,
LXX. eapdaK, was worshipped by the men of Ivah
(Avites, 2 Kings, xvii. .^1).

These Stymi)halian Birds of storm and darkness
had fled from Wolves ; and here we meet with the
familiar play on words XeuAco9-Xu/co?, just as Apollon,
the Lnjlit-ldw^, is besought to ])e as fierce as a ivolf.
Of course the lUrds fly from the Light-rays, just a^,
conversely, the solar Athamas receives hospitality
from Wolves. As of course, also, the Birds are
killed, and are merely frightened away. Both state-
ments are equally true ; storm and darkness perisn,
and again return. Play on words has ever please I
the mind, witness that ancient joke Bab-Hi (' Gate-
of-the-gods')-7if///e/ ('Confusion,' Gen. xl D), which
some people still take seriously ; and it also admirably
lends itself to symbolism, and ultimately, in many
cases, to confusion of thought. Thus, Lykaon
(=.the votary of the Phoenician Baal), having sacri-

200 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

ficed an infant to Zeus Lykaios (= Lapliystios, ' the
Glutton^ — for human sacrifices), became, ' they say,
a wolf instead of a man' (Paus. YIII. ii. 1), an
illustration of Hellenic horror at Phoenician ritual.
Here the ' untutored anthropologist ' will of course
see cannibalism, lycanthropy, and heaven knows what.
Thus, again, according to Plutarch {Peri Is. Ixxii),
in Eg}'pt the L} kopolites alone ate sheep, ' because
the Wolf, which they revere as a deity, does so.'
Let us take this statement for what it may be worth ;
but why did the Lycopolites revere the Wolf ? As
a totem -ancestor ? Xo, as a symbol of the Sun-god
(Tide Macrob. Sat. I. xvii. 40-1, for a reference to
the cult, and the play on words). Call this kind
of thing ' a disease of language,' or what you will.
There it is, a familiar factor in the situation.

Such, then, gentle reader, is the legend of Harekhal
and the Stymphalian Birds. You perceive which
system can explain it, and which systems cannot.
If the Aryan Zeus be right, follow him ; but, if Baal
for once be the proper god, then follow him.

XXXI. Roman divinity-names

The same difficulty which we encounter in Hellas
in determining whether this or that god-name and
god be Aryan or non-Aryan, we find also at Pome.
Just as the religion of Hellas is a combination of
Aryan and non- Aryan (Semitic) influences, so is the
religion of Rome a combination of Aryan and non-
Aryan (Etruscan) influences, + Hellenic importations.
We know that Ju-piter = Zev<^-7rarrjp both historically
and philologically, that in origin both were the same

Ill

] THE AKYO-SEMITIC SCHOOL 201

personage. We are equally well aware that the Lat.
Jupiter =Et. Tma, Tiiiia, as analogue, z.e., each
being the principal god in his respective Pantheon.
I have further endeavoured to show that the Et.
Tinla represents an original form Tlnglara^ which =
tlie Sum. Diiigira (=' creator,' then 'god'); and
that both are variant phases of the archaic Turanian
word meaning ' sky,' ' god,' ' creator,' which we find
in such forms as the Ak. dimer, Sum. glnglri
('goddess'), Gingira ('the goddess Istar'), Yakute
tangara^ Mongol tengrl^ Hunnish tangli\ Turkish
tangi'jj^ Tchagatai tirigri, Chinese tien (all meaning
'sky,' 'sky-god,' 'god'), Finnic tie (-Jumida),
Magyar ([.^)-ten ('god'), etc. And we may now also
take it for granted that the desperate efforts of the
last 200 years to prove that Etruscan is an Aryan
language are ahandoried, except possibly by one or
two savants whose lives have been wasted over them.
But when we examine the names, concepts, and
history of various members of the Roman Pantheon,
it is exceedingly difficult to determine their origin
with any certainty. Take the case of Minerva= Et.
]\[enrva. The history of the goddess tells us nothing
which decides the point. She is not found amongst
the other branches of the Aryan Family ; and we are
therefore left with the name alone. The difllicalties
connected with it will be appreciated when the
student has studied Prof. Miiller, Lects. Sci. Lang.
ii. 552, combined with Canon Is. Taylor, Etruscan
liesearches, p. 135 et seq. I merely instance this
Roman question as an illustration of the flict, that
the presence of non-Aryan divinities in the Pantheon
of an Aryan nation, is by no means an abnormal
phenomena.

202 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

XXXII. Conclusion

And here I bring- this ilhistrative sketch of the
principles of the Aryo- Semitic School of Hellenic
Mvtholoo'ists to a close. The instances ofiven are not
exhanstive, but simply by way of example ; and the
treatment is very brief. But enough has been sai 1
to show an unprejudiced reader that our system is
not dependent upon this or that etymology, is not a
chain A\diose strength is but that of some dubious and
fragile link. It is held together by the three -fold
cord of history, mythology and philology, supported
in a most valuable manner by art and archaeology ;
which latter studies can give no assistance to the
maker of Greek and Vedic comparisons. It is not a
bygone system, resting upon an exploded philology,
or upon complete ignorance of modern discoveries.
It is thoroughly up to date; and every newly trans-
lated cuneiform tablet, every fresh Phoenician
inscription, every Hittite find, every further relic of
antiquity laid bare by the spade, Mykenaean civiliza-
tion, Kretan pictograph, Egyptian papyrus, will but
confirm and strengthen it. I have not thought it
necessary in these pages to speak in detail of the
various gifts, beginning with letters, conferred by the
Semitic East upon Hellas. They are known to every
student; and I venture to think that if Prof. Miiller
should ever read this work, he will see that our
theory and standpoint are not based merely on a
few bold comparisons, such as Peleg and Pelasgos;
but that Ave have some reason alike for the faith, and
for the want of faith, that is in us.

As to Mr. Lang, who 'gives no quarter to his
adversaries' (Vide sup. p. 78), we have nothing to
fear from him. Mr. Casaubon himself is as likely to

Ill] THE AliYO-SEMITIC SCIK^OL 203

refute us. A man of his abilities and great position
ill journalism can for a time, assijited of course by
disciples, produce what he himself has stjded a
'backwater.' Ihit no empty sack of a system can
stand upright by itself ; and the totemism of the
'untutored anthropologist' is necessarily destined to
an absolute collapse. If people believe in it for the
moment, we are not discouraged. Trutli, as Prof.
Miiller says, is in no hurry. She is not dead,
although at times she may be sleeping. We

'Remember liow the course of Time will swerve,
Crook and turn upon itself in many a backward streaming
curve.'

Doubtless Mr. Lang, as the critic, anonymous or
otherwise, ' gives no quarter ' to the author who is
bound and gagged before him. As poor Mr. floseph
Jacobs, who had audaciously ventured to poach
upon ^Ir. Lang's preserve of fairy tales, remarked, in
the Academy : —

' I know nothino; more damai2:ino; and at the same
time irritating, than to be reviewed by Mr. Andrew
Lano' ' because, althoui2:li his corrections are excellent,
' the impression they leave is, as I think, so
abominably unjust by their Avant of proportion
between the few words of general and external
praise, and the huge remainder of specific fault-
tindino:.'

Yet ls\\\ Jacobs was so terrified at ^Ir. Lano-'s
very awful threat never to review his volumes again,
that he apologises, and dehnes his Reviewer as ' the
foremost figure among contemporary English [There
is some pleasantry here.] men of letters.' Notwith-
standing that he is such a ' fearful wildfowl ' as all
this, 1 don't feel much terror of ^Ir. Lang. For,

204 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY [ill

routed by his Mouse, deserted by his Bear, and
snarled at by his ^Yolf, whose ears it is neither safe
to hold nor to let go, he seems in somewhat evil
plight at present ; and I fear, from divers indications,
will fall a victim to the Corn-spirit. I see only one
chance for him. Let him abandon mythology again
(Vide sup. p. 78), say, for the next twenty years (he
may, of course, read it up a little quietly), and take
another severe course of the Cock Lane Ghost and
Co., or join a special midnight tour with that valiant
lady who, according to his entertaining pages, makes
appointments with spectres at 1 a.m. in churches in
Lincolnshire. Should he ever include in such travels
either of the fine old shrines that adorn this town,
I shall be happy, — not to give him a bed, he Avon't
want that,' — but breakfast after he has made a night
of it. Meanwhile, I say, as touching mythology, Let
the lio'ht enter.

205

APPENDIX A

PEOFESSOE AGUCHEKIKOS
ON TOTEMISM

[Reprinted from the edition of 188G)

From the Bunkumville Anthropological Gazette, April 1st,

A.D. 4886

' Now attest
That those, whom you call'd fathers, did beget you.'

— Shakspere

It is with sincere pleasure that we hail the appearance
of the twentieth and concluding Volume of Professor
Aguchekikos^ brilliant work, Anglican Totemism in the
Victorian Epoch, which has just been translated into
American by our learned fellow-countryman, Dr. Driveller.
If the contemplation of European man at a somewhat remote
period is rather calculated to depress the mind ; if these
interesting researches into the history of idiotic, but at the
same time remarkably inventive, distant connexions might
be deemed by the profane to throw some shadow, however
slight, upon Columbia herself, such a feeling will more than
disappear when, with just self-complacency, we contrast
our own intelligence with the Anglican imbecility of the
Victorian Epoch. At that period even the great Eepublic
was not quite the country she is now, when the entire

206 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

continent is divided between ourselves in the north and the
Mikado of Tierra del Fuego in the south. But, even then,
we were immeasurably in front of Britain, a land where, as
Professor Aguchekikos, a savant of whom New Athens may
well be proud, shows on almost every page, totemism
reigned supreme.

Totemism, as the Professor reminds us, is the belief that
one is descended from any natural object except man and
woman ; and this opinion, the intrinsic probability of which
will immediately carry its acceptance to an enlightened
mind, was once universal, as is shown by many a senseless
old story and bit of meaningless legend, but, above all, by
the animal-names that have come down to us. Man in
early times was an Evolutionist of the severest type.

Now, although the study of language, and the deductions
that used to be drawn from it in the pre-scientific period
are, on the whole, rather more worthless than the art of
table- turning, yet in one respect, and in one only, linguistic
research has been truly valuable ; it has revealed the names
upon which ancient totemism is based. True it is that all
other ancient name-study is ridiculous, for the obvious and
unanswerable reason that everybody is not agreed about
the meaning of every name. But the totemist is justified
in making an exception in favour of totem-names, or other-
wise, as Professor Aguchekikos well observes, ancient
totemism itself would disappear altogether. We are thus
enabled to feel a rational confidence that, if thousands of
years ago a man was called by some name bearing more
or less resemblance to words now used to signify ^ mouse,'
his name actually was Mouse ; and further, that he
regarded a veritable mouse as having been his great-
grandfather.

These considerations also indirectly involve another law
which, we are happy to say, is now ' no longer a theory, but
a generally recognized fact,' namely — The belief of mem in
early times ran exactly contrary to his experience. Thus, as
he had never seen or known a bear or a mouse bring forth
boys and girls, he necessarily concluded that these animals

ArrEXDTX 207

had done so in the past, and justly argued that what has
,once happened may happen again. True it is, as the
Professor notes, that in the pre-scientific period before the
wisdom of the ' untutored anthropologist ' was universally
allowed, people thought that the beliefs of early man were
the result of his observation and experience, but no one is
so dull as to entertain such a notion nowadays. The next
point about each tribal totem or revered ancestral object is
that it might not be eaten by any of the tribe. A very
ancient but delightful writer, and one, moreover, centuries
in advance of his time, has given us a singularly striking
instance of the appropriateness of this regulation, in remind-
ing us that ' among well-known totems none is more familiar
than the sun.' Had not the above rule been strictly
observed in early days, even such men as Professor
Aguchekikos and Dr. Driveller must have been at preseut
completely in the dark.

The totemist had a further prohibition, namely, that
membei-s of the same stock or tribe having the same totem,
as a rule, might not intermarry. Thus, in a tribe having a
Crane as their totem, a man whose name was Crane might
not marry a Miss Crane; and it is highly interesting to find
from many thousand examples cited by the Professor (Vide
Vol. xviii., pp. 1-1200), that this regulation was strictly
adhered to in Britain throughout the Victorian Epoch. The
Professor tells us that, after prolonged research, he cannot
meet with a single authentic instance of a Mr. Bull marrying
a Miss Bull, or a Mr. Crane marrying a Miss Crane ; whilst,
on the other hand, he had met with a case of a Mr. Crane
marrying a Miss Lamb, a girl of course belonging to
another totem tribe.

But a totem, as the Professor shows, need not even be an
animal ; and we have strong reasons for believing that at
the remote epoch in question a Thistle was the great totem
of the northern part of the island of Britain, just as Plutarch
tells us (or more shame for him if he doesn't), that some
Athenians believed they were descended from an Asparagus-
plant, a vegetable which Dr. Driveller informs us in a foot-

208 IIELLEXIC MYTHOLOGY

note, is supposed to be identical with tlie Frutex Curiosvs
or ' Rum Shrub/

Such, then, is totemism; and as there are animals, plants,
and other natural objects all over the world, we see that it
necessarily prevailed in every country in early times. Man
was not then ' prosing about the weather,^ or examining the
face of nature. Like the soldiers in Giglio's army (to
quote from a historical romance called The Rose and the
Ring, attributed to the semi-mythical writer Thackeray),
he scarcely noticed the difference between day-light and
dark ; and paid no great attention to the sun beyond
declining to eat it. The stars, however, did come in for
some share of his observation; and, as anyone who will
look at them sees at once that their groups don^t in the
least resemble bears, lions, or any other animals ; so, as the
Professor w^ell shows, acting on the same great law, in
accordance with which, as noticed, early belief was exactly
contrary to experience, man at once necessarily concluded
that the stars were literally bears, lions, etc., and accordingly
spoke of the Bear, the Lion, and other sky animals, even
in the Victorian Epoch. Are we entitled to say that the
Britishers did not really suppose there was an actual lion in
the sky at night ? Not in the least. As the Professor
points out, the present belief (whatever it may really be) of
the Kakoriboos is decisive on the question.

So deep is the obscurity of antiquity that, even after the
efforts of almost a lifetime, the Professor seems doubtful
whether a Lion or a Bull was the national totem of South
Britain in the Victorian Epoch ; and he has in vain tried to
decide the question by a searching investigation whether
their flesh was eaten, and which was least popular at dinner
parties. Dr. Driveller remarks in a foot-note, that no one
ate Bull who could get anything else.

In the part of the island then called Wales there is a
similar doubt between the Goat and the Onion ; and here
the Professor well reminds us that Pliny states the
Egyptians swore by the Onion whilst others are said to
have sworn at it. It is almost certain that, at the period in

APPENDIX 209

question onions were eaten in some places; and even in a
then former age, Herodotus (ever a trustworthy authority)
speaks of the vast number of onions devoured by the G reat
Pyramid Builders. But in Britain the Onion was doubtless
eaten only in contempt and defiance of the Welsh, or other
tribes who had an onion totem. Shakspere, a verse writer
and tale-inventor, who lived somewhere about the time,
describes one Pistol, an enemy to the Welsh, as eatiug a
leek. This same writer, who seems to have had a fair
amount of talent for an early European, nevertheless
affords a melancholy illustration of the folly of the human
mind of the period. As the Professor shows by many
quotations from his works (which have been preserved in
America), he believed that Day was a gaudily-dressed,
chattering child, with a somewhat tender conscience ; and
that the Sea was a woman in whose bosom the child slept at
eventide (2 Henry VI., iv. 1) ; that the Stars were candles
put in the sky by a person called Night {Romeo and Juliet^
Hi. 5) ; that the Sun was drawn in a coach {Titus Andron.
ii. 1) by flame-footed horses {Romeo and Juliet , Hi. 2), and
so on. Such a state of mind seems very strange to us now,
but we understand it at once when we remember the
remarks of the traveller Von Poddiugcoft, on what is
supposed to be the present state of mind of the Kakoriboos,
The Professor justly, but yet perhaps almost unneces-
sarily, reprobates the foolish habit which formerly prevailed
amongst the now happily extinct class of philologists and
comparative mythologists of quoting from ancient docu-
ments, sacred books, inscriptions, and the like, it being as
impossible to make either head or tail of any of them as it
is to say what was the meaning of the word ' Zeus.' If any
caviller should be hardy enough to enquire ' Why, then,
does the Prof essor indulge in the above quotations?' let him
remember that, as in philology (otherwise worthless), an
exception is made as above noticed, in favour of totem-
names, so, as regards ancient literature of all kinds, the
scientifically untutored anthropologist of course accepts

2IO HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

anything wliicli seems to bring grist to his mill, and riglitly
rejects the rest.

A few more details culled from the Professor's brilliant
pnges respecting the toteniistic Britain of the Victorian
Epoch cannot fail to be of interest. Thus, it is strange to
learn that even in the City of London, which might have
been fairly regarded as the very centre of knowledge
totemism prevailed almost universally. Two totem clans
especially, the Bulls and the Bears, seem to have fiercely
opposed each other in a struggle which, like the Hittite wars
of old, lasted for centuries. The causes of this contest are
very obscure ; but we read that it was connected with a
* stuck exchange.* This at once reminds us of tree
totemism, and Dr. Driveller, in a valuable note, refers to
the ancient practice of the Hebrews of asking ' counsel of
their stocks.' The ingenious and highly probable con-
clusion at which the Professor arrives is that the two tribes
decided for some (unknown) reason to exchange their
stocks or totems, but that disputes arose in carrying out the
arrangement. With reference to Bull-totems the most un-
tutored anthropologist will at once remember the golden
calf of Aaron, the wooden bull of Daedalus, the ox-headed
Astarte, the bull-horned Bacchus, the cow-horned Isis and
lo, and many others. The Bears, too, were an ancient
clan ; one Samuel Johnson is said to have been a prominent
member of it.

Ycry many totem tribes existed in Britain at the Victorian
Epoch. Amongst others the Professor mentions the clans
of Bear, Bull, Bullock, Bird, Buzzard, Bee, Crane, Crow,
Dove, Ducker, Duckham, Fish, Finch, Gooseman, Gosling,
Hawk, Hogg, Jay, Lamb, Marten, Otter, Pike, Pigg
Sahuon, Steer, Swallow, Wren, and Norfolk-Howard. The
rigidity with which the principles of totemism were observed
is well shown by the fact that no single instance can be
adduced in which clans bearing the names of Buzzard, Bee,
Crow, Finch, Hawk, Jay, Marten, Swallow, Wren, and
Norfolk-Howard, ate the flesh of these creatures. The

APPENDIX 211

Norfolk- Howard totem at once reminds the mitutored
anthropologist of Baal-zebub the totem of Ekron, which, as
everybody knows, was only a big blue-bottle. Dr. Driveller^
in a note, well conjectures that the Blue-bottle and Norfolk-
Howard totems were carried about the country ; for the
former seems also to have been known in Britain where
there was a popular saying, ' The (blue) bottle stands with
you,' i.e., for the time being. He adds, too, that it is
certain that Flies, which were not literal insects, were moved
about in some of the towns. It is strange that we do not
find the Mouse as a British totem ; but this is probably to
be accounted for by the awe with which, as in Egypt, the
Cat was held. In Britain even the most desperate criminals
were greatly afraid of it.

Comparative mythologists used (oddly enough) to think
that divinities were called Smintheus (^ Mouse '-god), Par-
nopios (' Locust '-god), and the like, because they were
supposed to defend mankind against the ravages of such
creatures, as indeed ancient, but justly-forgotten, authors
state (Vide Strabo, xiii. 64; Pausanias, i. 24). But we
now see at once (or at all events ought to do so) that men
thought they were descended, or had ascended, from mice
and locusts ; and, if this seem very strange to us, we may
remember that sailors in the Victorian Epoch would, still
more strangely, speak of a comrade as being ' the son of
a gun.'

Amongst other absurd notions which the Professor shows
then prevailed in Britain was one which is said to have been
nut unknown among the Etruscans ; namely, that the
souls of animals when sacrificed ascend to heaven as gods.
The Priest, it seems, was accustomed to say to a sacrificer
who had not paid the full fee or ^ duty,' — * Twopence more,
and up goes the donkey.' Untutored Anthropologists will
remember that this belief is treated of by Labeo, in his
familiar work De cliis qiilbus ovigo animalis est. The Pro-
fessor himself has also dealt with it in a separate monograph
on the ancient mysteries, entitled, The Umbrella-stand in the
Entrance Hall : a Study of the British Museum.

14 ^

2 12 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

That profound ignorance of the habits of animals which
is so characteristic of the modern savage, aLso obtained
almost universally in Britain at this unhappy Epoch. Thus,
even in a grave and philosophical Journal called Punch (a
word of unknown meaning), some fragments of which have
survived, lion cubs were pictorially represented as bearing
arms, and marching like soldiers under the leadership of an
old lion. But, in this instance, as in nearly all others, we
notice that belief ran exactly contrary to experience.

Someone somewhere says that Jupiter became an ant ;
and, similarly, the Professor has discovered that an ant-
totem likewise existed in Britain. We hear of one Emmett,
a Yorkshireman, who is said to have been also celebrated as
a cricket, or cricketer as some termed it. Dr. Driveller
observes, in a note, that there seems to have been some
Confusion between insects here; and, indeed, confusion is
necessarily not altogether absent from totemistic research.
We have mentioned Jupiter; and several funny stories were
formerly current in Britain about him. The meaning of
his name is of course unimportant, and besides, is neces-
sarily unknown ; but one writer of that age said (in the
Encyclopaedia Britannica- — ever the highest authority in
matters mythological) that he was a king of the family of
the Titans, and reigned in Krete. The general idea of him,
however, was that he was a layman who was fond of reading
the lessons in church; and 'The Lesson of Jupiter^ was a
familiar expression of the time. Untutored Anthropologists
differ as to whether it was the first or the second or (possibly
even the third) lesson which he read ; and certainly it does
not seem to have been much attended to in some quarters.

In one respect, and in one only, do the ancient totemists
appear to have surpassed us moderns; and this, curiously
enough, was in their poAver of invention. Even here, how-
ever, some of the writers in our evening newspapers and a
certain section of Anthropologists run them hard. We find
from the Professor's researches that the savage ancestors
of the Chaldaeans, Greeks, Anglicans, and other ancient
nations 'invented' the filth}^ and senseless stories which

APPENDIX 213

Lave since passed current as mytliology and religion in order
to supply ' amusing narrative/ It was certainly extremely
kind of these poor pe(^ple to take sucli trouble thus to
entertain their contemporaries and posterity ; but, at the
same time, it most be admitted that they have incurred a
somewhat serious responsibility by so doing, inasmuch as
they have beguiled the time for their successors in more
senses than one. Here, as in so many other instances,
experience shows that to mean well is almost always
equivalent to doing badly. It is a little odd, too, that these
senseless and somewhat Rabelaisian tales were forthwith
accepted by the Priesthood, and cherished as the most
sacred mysteries of the faith. But so it was.

We rejoice to find, on such high authority, that the stories
in question are meaningless, and that to examine them is
chercher raison oil il n'y en a pas ; (1) because this view saves
so much trouble ; and (2) because all we see and know of
man in later times confirms our belief in his habit of
absolutely inventing things apropos of nothing. Thus, in
the pre-scientific period laborious triflers professed to work
out the alleged slow and strictly natural (as opposed to
' inventive ') processes by which the art of writing, the
alphabet, or the ideas about the ancient constellations had
(as they declared) gradually arisen. Never again, fortun-
ately, shall we work on lines such as these. Some nameless
necessarily nameless (for we do not know that any particular
name, not being a totem-name, is really ancient, and people
talked about kings and queens long before there had been
any), benefactor filled with this excellent wish to amuse,
' invented ' the art of writing and jotted down an alphabet ;
and some other equally worthy soul (popularly supposed to
have been a Chaldaean shepherd undisturbed by foot-and-
mouth disease) looking up at the sky, which, somehow, he
must necessarily have regarded as a man, reeled off the eight-
and-forty old constellations — the Ram, Bull, Twins, and all
the rest of them, in a style which, as Mr. Pickwick obser\red
of the pleasantries of Mr. Peter Magnus, ' must have been
calculated to afford his friends the highest gratification,'

2 14 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

altbougli at tbe same time it has greatly mystified posterity.
For, what truly untutored anthropologists would trouble to
investigate whether such things ever really had any meaning ?
Certainly not the enlightened ' dabblers w^ho mark with a
pencil the pages of travellers and missionaries/ If the
question ^ How did the stars get their names ?^ must be
asked, as the Professor justly replies, 'Men gave them
those names/ and because it was ' their nature to/ and
there^s an end of the matter.

It is a golden rule, and one strongly laid down by the
Professor, to assume that anything which we cannot under-
stand has no meaning. No other principle can really save
self-respect ; for_, if anything be rational we must necessarily
understand it, unless, indeed, we ourselves are irrational, a
supposition not to be entertained. Nor, again, is a man's
complete ignorance of the meaning of names, stories, or a
subject generally, any disqualification to his treating of it
at length. Has not the Unknowable itself been discussed
through hundreds of pages, and shall the Unintelligible
escape us ? Perish the thought.

We have merely indicated the wealth of truth and learn-
ing to be found in the pages of Professor Aguchekikos, and
for more must refer the eager reader to the great original.
We can but just mention his interesting account of the
hostile political totem tribes of the Foxes and the Wolves.
How the efi'orts of a great ancestral Fox were said to have
been stopped by a Pitt (Pit ?), into which, no doubt, he fell
— trapped by some early hunter ; how the Anti-Foxites are
reported to have sent a chieftain named Wolf to Egypt,
probably to Lycopolis where, as Strabo (xvii. 40) informs
us, the Wolf was worshipped, of course as a totem-ancestor;
and how the transformation of men into animals, reptiles,
plants, etc., which is said to be still the current creed of
Cairo, Kamtchatka, and Panchoea, was fully believed in by
the Britons of the Victorian Epoch, so that a man was
known to say his friend had become ' a snake in the grass.'
It seems, too, that there then existed a mysterious tribe of
mythologists who were popularly credited with the extra-

APPENDIX 215

ordinary power of ^ turning everything into the sun/ But,
as for these things and many like unto them, are they not
written in the pages of Aguchekikos and Driveller? A
solitary sage of the time had another view about matters of
the kind. He declared that religion, mythology, and belief
generally were based upon dreams; and to this opinion, as
one affording a good substantial foundation, we should cer-
tainly have inclined, had not the totemistic truths of the
Professor dawned upon us as clear as the A.svins. Such
being the case, the dream theory, although highly com-
mended, must fade; and we confidently predict that, not-
withstanding an unworthy fear expressed in some quarters
lest this key of knowledge should become as rusty as
Mr. Casaubon's, the gospel according to Aguchekikos vvill
be universally admired and adopted when Homer and
Vergil are forgotten, although probably not until then.

Opinions of Some * Allies ' on Aguchekikos

' The charming ' review of Totemism. I read it with
intense pleasure, and wondered who the writer could be.
It is as witty as it is wise, and quite a perfect work of art
in its kind.' — P. Le Page Renouf.

' I was very amused by it, and it is to the point.' —
Prof. C. P. TiELE (Leiden University).

' German readers Avill appreciate the fine humour of the
little work.' — Dr. 0. Gruppe (Berlin).

'Deals in the right way with one of the epidemics of
nonsense with which our unfortunate nation is sick just now.
— James Anthony Feoude.

2l6 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

'Mr. Euskin was immensely tickled. Totemism raised
inextinguishable laughter/ — W. G. Collingwood.

' Most witty.'— Dr. F. A. Paley.

Note. — We desire to spare the blushes of the following
'Allies': —

'An admirable burlesque upon the scientific absurdities
now current.'

' Aguchekikos was beautiful. It delighted my heart.^

' The clever satire upon Totemism.'

'Very good— it hits hard.'

' I was greatly delighted with Aguchekikos.'

'The uncommon cleverness of the skit.'

' It is extremely good.' ' Splendidly effective.^

APPENDIX 2 I 7

APPENDIX B

List of Papers by the Author on Astronomical
Mythology

I. In the Archaeologia.
On a German Astronomico- Astrological Manuscript, and
On the Origin of the Signs of the Zodiac, 19 illustrations
(1883).

Remarhs on the Gryphon, Heraldic and Mythological,
4 illustrations (1885).

' The gryphon is a worthy follower of the unicorn.
You have left little more to be found out about him.' —
Prof. Sayce.

II. In the Yorkshire Archaeological Journal.

Remarhs on the zodiacal Virgo, in connexion with a
Representation of the Constellation upon the Porch of
S. Margaret's Church, Yorlc, 21 illustrations (1886).

'A masterpiece.' — Prof. Sayce.

III. In The Babylonian and Oriental Record.

Babylonian Astronomy in the West — the Aries of Aratos
(Jan. 1887).

Remarks on some Euphratean Astronomical Names in the
Lexikon of Hesychios (July- Aug. 1887).

IV. In the Proceedings of the Society of Bibhcal
Archaeology.

Remarks on the Tablet of the Thirty Stars, 2 illustrations
(Jan.-Feb. 1800).

2l8 HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

Remarks on the Euphratean Astronomical Names of the
Signs of the Zodiac, 18 illustrations (Marcli, 1891).

Euphratean Stellar Researches, Part I. 5 illustrations
(April, 1892), Part II. 2 illustrations (May, 1893), Part III.
(June, 1893), Part IV. 5 illustrations (Jan. 1895), Part V.
(Dec. 1895-Jan. 1896).

V. In tlie Transactions of the Ninth International
Congress of Orientalists (London, 1892).

The Celestial Equator of Aratos. 33 illustrations.

VI. In the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.

Ihe Origin of the Ancient Northern Constellation-figures
(April, 1897).

VII. In The Academy.

The Early Babylonian Kings and the Ecliptic (May 31,

1884).

The Babylonian Zodiac (Jan. 29, 1887).

The Zodiacal Crab (Feb. 21, 1885 ; Dec. 6, 1890).

The Milhj way in Euphratean Stellar Mythology (Jan. 9,
1892).

Soma and Rohini (Nov. 12, 1892).

' The Ten Patriarchs of Berosus ' (June 3, July 15, 1893).

The Te Tablet (Nov. 4, 1893).

Review of Sir Norman Loclnjer's ' Dawn of Astronomy '
(March 3], 1894).

The Connexion between Babylonian and Greek Astronomy
(Nov. 10, 1894).

APPENDIX 219

' For tuna Maior' (Jan. 12, 1895).

The Archaic Lunar Zodiac (March 23, 1895).

The God Tartah (July 20, 1895).

Greek Coin Types and the ConsteUation Figures (Sept. 2L,
1895).

Phoenicia and the Ancient Constellation Figures (Nov. 7,
189(3).

221

INDEX

I. AUTHOES

Achilles Tatius, 168, 175
Aelian, 169
A.^aosthenes, 64, 184
Aischylos, 77. 120, 191
Alphunsiue Tables, 189, 198
Amos, 142
Anaximandros, 165
Antipatros, 161
Aratos, 19, 64, 66, 168, 173, 181,

185, 189
Aristophanes, 68
Armpiiidas, 139
Arnold, Matthew, 93
Atlu^naios, 161, 184, 192
Avienus, 170

Babelon, Mons., 127

Bachofen, 63, 70

Bacon, Lord, 120

Batrachomyomachia, 60, 188

Bechtel, Prof. 16, 36

Benfey, 8, 35

Berard, Mons. Victor, 47. 63-5,
Q7, 92, 109-11, 117, 140. 144,
147, 156, 168-9, 171, 193-5

Berosos, 175, 192

Birch, Samuel, 157

Bochart, 81

Boscawen, Mr. W. St. C, 134

Breal, Prof., 18, 91

Biinsen, 114, 171

Canizzaro. Si^nor, 78

/ Chronicles, 110

Cicero, 170

Cox, Sir Geo. W., 31, 38, 92-3

CuUimore, 199

Curtius, 9, 35, 135

Pamaskios, 114, 171, 192
Darmesteter, James, 18
Deeeke, Dr., 91
Dikaiarchos, 139
Dioi^enes, Laert., 165, 189

Dionysidoros, 143
Duncker, Prof., 92, 99

Ecclesiastes, 152-3
Encyr.lopaedia Britannica, 32,

212
Etymol. Maq., 195
Euripides, 167, 174, 189
Eusebios, 182
Eustathios, 42
Ezekiel, 149

Faenell, Mr. L. R., 8, 41-2, 47,
68-9, 98, 101, 118, 130-1, 140,
155-6, 159-60, 194

Pick, 8, 123

Firmicus. 170

Fowler, Mr. Ward. 60

Frazer, Mr. J. T., 5, 14, 40, 60-1,
70

Furtw angler, Prof., 36

Gardnee, Dr. Percy, 104

Gemtnos, 168

Genesis, 94, 116, 133, 140, 161,

199
Germanicus, 170
Gesenius, 103, 194, 197
Gladstone, Et. Hon. W. E., 49,

129, 146, 150-1, 167
Goldziher, Dr., 117
Gomme, Mr. G. L., 10
Grimm, 11
Grohmann, 60
Gruppe, Dr., 92, 94
Gubernatis, Prof. De, 172

Karlez, Mons. De, 71

Head, Mr. B. v., 134

Ht^hn, Victor, 135

Helladios, 192

Henry. Prof. Victor, 9

Herodotos, 1, 88, 98, 122, 121,

147, 157, 165
Hesiod, 64, 113

222

HELLENIC .MYTHOLOGY

Hcpyeliios, 101, 140, 159, 169,

173, 189, 196
Hilpreclit, Prof, 170
Hogarth, Mr. D. G., 29, 87, 148
Homer, 15, 49, 104, 117-8, 121-2,

128, 145, 149-54, 156, 1601,

173-4, 181-8, 196
Hommel, Prof. Fritz, 66, 92, 95,

148
Horapollon, 157
Hosea, 154
Hyginus, 167, 174, 183

Iamblichos, 157

Ideler, 66

Ihering, Prof , 164

Isaiah, 139

Jacobs, Mr. Joseph, 203

tToh, 153

Joshua, 61

Judges, 103, 138

Kallimachos, 189
Katasterismui, 183
Xeller, O., 64
/ Kings, 104
2 Kirigs, 199
Klaiidios lolaos, 195
Kleanthes, 19
£orinna. 173
KoMyuKJik Collect,, 132
Kuhn, 7

Lacouperie, 192

Lajard, 172, 199

Lang, Mr. AiidTew, passim

Leake, 124

Legge, Mr. F., 158

Lrnormant, Franyois, 91, 114,

126-7, 141, 143, 182, 192
Lewis, SirG. C, 163, 185
Lucian, 64, 102

Macdonell, Prof., 8, 18
Macrobius, 141, 143, \b6, 200
Manilius, 170
Mannhardt, 5, 14, 16, 44-6, 49-50,

61
Maspero, Prof., 57, 158
Maury, 92
McLennen, 16. 74
Mehlis, Dr., 39
Menand, 39
Merry, Mr. W. W., 185

Minokhircd, 189

Mnaseas, 143

Morselli, Prof., 78

Movers, 114, 159

Midler, Et. Hon. Prof. F. Max,

■passim
Midler, Otfried, 83, 116, 146,

162-3, 198

^N^ONNos, 138

Ovid, 170

Panyasts, 70, 184

Pauli, Prof., 91

Paiisanias, passim

Peisandros, 170, 184, 197

Pherekydes Sy., 117

Philon Byb., 114, 142, 161, 179,

182
Pinches, Mr. T. G., 95
Pindar, 117, 127, 172
Pisinos, 170, 184
Platon, 107, 189
Pliny, 103, 171
Ploix, Mons., 39
Plutarch, 58, 138, 147-8, 200
Polybios, 197
Porphyry, 34, 64, 147
Praxilla, 116
Preller, 35
Proverbs, 153
Psalms, 152-4
Pythagoras, 64

Renan, 64

Renouf, Sir P. Le Page, 13, 53
Koscher, Prof., 8, 20, 34, :i8
Euskin, Prof., 3j, 190, 193

I Samuel, 61

Sanchouniathon, 114-5, 140-2
Sayce, Eev. Prof., 13, 55-8, 75-6,

92, 97, 100, 134-8, 148, Itil
Scherer, Herr, 8
Schliemann, 162, 172
Schroeder, 141
Schwartz, 35
Sebillot, Mons., 172
Servius, 42

Skeat,Ee^v. Prof., 81, 135
Skopaa, 144
Smith, George, 84

INDEX

223

Smith, Eobertson, IG, 55-7

Solinus, 47, 156

Sophokles, lOfJ

Souidas, 139, 109

Spencer, Mr. Herbert, 5, 25, 41

Steinthal, Prof., 172

Stephanos, Byzant., 1(31

Stesimbrotos, 182

Steuding, Herr, 155

S. Paul, 19, 108

Strabo, 57, 00, 87. 105-6, 211

Svoronos, Mons., 170

Tayloe, Canon Is., 92, 168, 201

Thales, 189

Theon, 166

Tieie, Prof., 114, 150

Tobit, 115

Tylor, Dr. E. B.. 74

Ulugh Beigh, 198

VlTRUVIUS, 170

W.A.I., 133, 169, 175, 187-8
Walters, Mr. H. B., 97
Welcker, 35
Wellhausen, Pro^., 95
Wharton, E. E., 135
Wilkinson, Sir J. G., 59
Wroth, Mr. Warwick, 127, 191
Yaska, 72

11. GENERAL

Aa. 149

Abaddon, 153

Abraham, 95

Achilleus, 152

Adonis, 87, 148-9, 195

Agamedes, 168

Agenor, 132

Agni, 119-20

Ahana, 7, 36-7, 73

Aia, 149

Aiakos, 159

Aias. 167

Aido, 149

Aidoneus, 20, 99, 120-1, 151, 196

Aietes, 149

Aigai, 128

Aigina, 122, 159

Ai-lenu, 149

Aiora, 174

Aithiopians, 122

Alexander, 29, 87

Alkamenes, 159

Allat, 154

Alrucaba, 189

Altair, 199

Altar, 175, 179

Althepos, 103-4

Amaltheia 184

Amazons, 161

Amen, 87

Amma, 118

Amphion, 142

Amphitrite, 128, 188

Amraphel, 95

Amyklas, 195

Anna, 132

Andromeda, 141, 156, 169, 183,

193
Antarata, 161
Ann, 75, 121
Aos, 192
*Apavalyan, 17
Aphrodite, 17, 21, 128-31, 139,

156
— — Axiokerse, 144

Encheios, 130, 140

Melanis, 144

Ourania, 101, 131, 144

Pandemos, 101

Apollon, 17-18, 20, 97-9, 196

Delphinios, 176

Ismenios, 141, 162

Karnaios, 116. 162

Panopios, 60, 211

Smintheus, 58-61, 211

etymon, 17-18

Arabia, 66, 78, 95

Archal, 100

Archaleus, 195

Archer, 177

Areion, 41, 51

Ares, 20, 99. 130, 139, 195

Aretias, 195

Argo, 176

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

Argonauts, 195
Argynnis, 129
Ariadne, 171
Arkadia, 61-3, 140, 194
Arkas, 61-3, 65
Arkiouros, 185
Arrow, 163, 169, 198
Artemis, 61-71, 88, 97, 102, 148,
173

Brauronis, 67-70

Ephesia, 64, 161

Eurvnome, %!

Kail i St e, 64, 67

Kelkaia, 160

Limnaia, 102

Limnatis, 102, 118

Melekhet, 159

Orthia, ^1

Patroa, 150

Polymastos, Q*I

Stymphalis, 197

Taurike, ^1

■ etymon, 71

Artliur, 176

Asar, 96

Asari, 96

'Aschtharth, 101, 115, 139-40

Asherali, 67

Ashqelon, 61, 102, 127, 131

Ashtoreth, 129

Qarnaim. 116

Askar, 128, 186
Asklepioa, 103, 171, 174, 188
Assor, 150

Astarte, 101, 110, 115, 129, 171
Ast-No'ema, 156
A^vinau, 42
Atalante, 64

Atar-'ati (Atargatis), 102, 161
Ate, 161

Athamas, 144-9, 184, 194
Athas, 161

Athena, 7, 20, 34-7, 73, 97-8
100-4, 106-7, 141

Astyanassa, 104

Ilia, 160-1

Onka,48, 88, 140-1, 162

Pallas, 73

Polias, 104

■ Promachos. 73

Stliemias, 104

etymon, 36-7

Athonai, 100
Atlas, 188-9
Atys, 161
Axiokerse, 115

Axiokersos, 116
Aza (Gaza), 61, 65
Azan, 'ob

Baal, 132, 139. 155, 194,, 200

Hamon, 65, 132, 145, 167

Middoh, 167

Eaphon, 167

Tropba, 168

Baalath, 132

Bab-ili (Babylon), 199

Babylonians, 48, 56, 147, 154

Baitulos, 141-2

Bakchos, 137, 141, 147

Balance, 175

Barsipki (Borsippa), 139

Bar-sav, 141

Baubo, 158
Bear, the, 61-71, 190
Bearioard, 65
Bel, 76, 87, 121, 132
Belos, 132
Beth-el, 141
Bhurawyu, 7
Biers. 190
Bilu, 75, 132

Maradukii, 142

Bilat, 132, 136

Bird, 198-9

Birds, Stymphalian, 195-9

Boiotia, 112-3, 127, 140, 146, 148,

152. 156, 168
Boiotos, 127
Boreas, 49
Bowl, 175-6
Bo-s6os, 141
Britomartis, 156
Bull, 177, 179-83. 191

Capella, 66, 128, 184

Chaitan, 26, 89

Charis, 129

Charioteer, 170, 191

Charites, 130, 138

Cheiron, 175, 188, 193

Christus, 89

Chronos, 115, 119

Corn-spirit, the, 5, 49-50, 70, 204

Crah, 172, 177-8, 182, 191, 218

Crown, 170

Dagon,47, 102, 121,126, 172, 192
Danaos, 132
Dardanos, 150
Davkina. 48

INDEX.

22 S

Delphoi, 97-8, 122
Demeter, 12-13, 15-16, 20

Erinys, 41-51

Hippia, 41, 127, 162

Melaine, 41, 127, 144, 162

Demosthenes, 107

Deo, 124

Derketo, 102-3, 127, 161, 184

Despoina, 41, 46

Deva, 12

Dido, 132

Diktynna, 156

Dione, 130

Dionysos, 16, 21, 118, 122, 132,

145, 150, 173-4
Axiokersos, 143-4

Dikeros, 137

Eleliehthon, 126

Hyes, 138^

— — Kerasphoros, 137

Keratophues, 137

Keros, 137

Pelekys, 161

Pyriphenges, 137

Pyropos, 137

Stylos, 137, 150

Taurokeros, 137

Taurometopos, 137

Tauromorphos, 137

— — Taurophues, 2. "^7

Tauropos, 137

etymon, 133-4

Dioskouroi, 111, 179, 188

Dog, 166, 172-4, 186-7

twy-headed, 191

Dogs, of Marduk, 172

Dolphin, 41, 47, 170, 188, 191

Doto, 132

Dove, the, 41, 47, 172

Duwu-zi, 148-9

Dyaus, 18,28,89, 120

Dyaush-pitar, 7

t^, 47-8, 121, 128, 175, 192

^labani, 178

Eagle, 169, 187, 191

Edom, 134

Egypt, 54-7, 58-9, 147

Ekbatana, 138

t\, 116, 178, 196

£:iekt6r, 139

£:i-'Eli6n, 140

Elieus, 140

6lis, 138

El-Khargeh, 157

£^6s, 7

Erehh, 116

Erebos, 116

Erek-hayim, 110

Erichthonios, 49, 101-2, 124, 191

trigone, 110, 171, 174

Erinys, 7, 51

Erykine, 171

Eschmim, 141, 144, 157, 171

Etruscan, 149, 190, 200-1

Euktemon, 168

Euphrantides, 147

Europe, 132

Eurynome, 67, 117-8, 156, 187

Fennechu (Phoenicians), 132
Fishes, 178, 180-4, 192

Ge, 12, 102

Ge-meter, 12

Genetyllides, 160

Gesdin, 136

Gilgames, 169-70, 193, 197

Epic, 178

Ginna, 142
Glaukos, 127, 193
Goat (Aix), m, 128, 184

Hades, 120, 151-4

Ha-Ka-Ptah (Aigyptos), 132, 150

Haptoiringa, 189

Har (Horos), 96

Hare, 172

Harekhal, 99, 141, 194-5

Harit, 129

Hekate, 155-60

Angelos, 156

Chthonia, 156

Eurippa, 156

Kalliste, 156

Kelkaia, 160

Kourotrophos, 160

Meilione, 155

Soteira, 156

Helle, 146

Helios, 97-8, 122, 195

Hephaistos, 20, 73, 102, 130, 157

Heqit, 157-8

Hera, 20, 64, 99, 145

Akraia, 47, 162

Herakles, 31, 60, 97-100, 139, 143,
169-70, 193-9

Mainomenos, 99, 145

Hercules, 9
Herkyna, 171
Hermeias, 7

226

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

Hermes, 8-9, 20, 38-40, 139-40,143

Hesper-Phospher, 129, 185

Hestia, 20

Hexateuch, the, 96

Hittites, 161

Horse, 101, 170, 193

Horus (As.), 103

Hyades, 184-6

Hyakinthos, 195

Hyponoia, the, 6, 45, 52, 72, 98

Hypsouranios, 142

Iasion, 7, 50

Ida, 125-6

ledoud, 179

Iktinos, 106

!l, 116, 139, 142

India, 83, 147, 183

Ino, 132, 144-6

lo, 149

lolaos, 194

lolkos, 146, 194

loxidai, 57-8

Isis, 53, 87

Istar, 115, 129, 139-40, 149, 171,

179
Itanos, 127
Itonos, 127

Juno, 47, 88
Jupiter, 7, 18

planet, 87, 142

Justinian, 108

Kabieim (Kabeiroi), 111-2, 141,

143, 157
Kadmos, 82-3, 132
Kadmeia, 139
Kadmilos, 143
Kallisto, 62. 64-5
Kandaon, 172
Xarnos, 116
Karkom, 116
Kasmilu, 144
Kassandros. 139
Kassiepeia, 164, 169, 187
Kedalion, 173
Keft, 132

Keph (Xepheus), 141, 169
Kerberos, 7, 191
Ketaioi, 150
Khammurabi, 95
Kharmon (Harmonia), 132
Khna, 132

Khshayarsha (Xerxes), 89
Khumbaba, 178

Kimmerioi, 150

Kimon, 108

Kirke, 149-51

Kiyun, 142, 150

Kore, 144

Korinth, 47, 122

Krete, 126-8

KroJcos, 116

Kronion, 115

Zronos, 21, 112-19, 139, 142, 195

Kudur-lagamar, 94

Kynosoura, 64

Kypros, 129-31, 171

Kythera, 131

Kyzikos, 191

Laish, 103
L^is, 103
Leukothea, 144-5
Libye, 122
Lileth, 76
Linos, 149
Lion, 177-84
Loki, 50

Lugal-tudda, 75-6
Luna, 139, 149
Lunus, 149
Lykour^os, 174

Maira, 174

Makar, 100

Makaria, 100

Manoah, 132

Marath (Marathon), 99

Marathus (Amrit), 99

Margidda, 188-9

Mars, 139, 141

Mazzaroth, 183

Melanippe, 127

Melekhet-Haschamaim, 131

-qartha, 104

Melikertes 89, 111, 132, 145, 191

Melqarth,89, 111, 132, 139, 176,196

Mene, 140

Mercurius, 140

Mercury, 140

Merodach, 142, 169

Milkom, 104

Minerva, 201

Minos, 132

Molekh, 104

Mouse, the, 58-61

Mulge, 154

Mul-lil, 76, 154, 188

Mykenai, 169

Mylitta, 129

INDEX

227

Nabu (Nebo), 133, 110
Nebuchadrezzar, 153
Nannar, 97
Naxos, ()4, 122
Nekyia, 151-4
Neptunus, 124
Nereus, 122
Nerval, 141
Ninip, 142
Ninkigal, 154
Nysa, 133

Odysseus, 31, 104, 122, 151-3

Oidipous, 148

Olympia, 119

Olympos, 27, 121

Onkos, 41

OpMon, 117-8

Oraia, 103

Orion, 172-3, 185-6, 188

Oros, 103

Osiris, 14, 53, 96

Pan, 20

Palaimon, 65. 132, 145, 167

Palamedes, 166-8

Paradeisos, 117

Parsondes, 97

Pataikoi, 157

Pausteria, 173

Pegasos, 193

Peleus, 117

Pentheus, 174

Perikles, 107

Persephoneia, 154

Perseus, 141, 169, 187

Pheidias, 106

Phelesheth (Philistia), 126

Phigaleia, 41, 196

Phoinix, 132

Phoroneut^, 7

Phrixos, 146

Pig, the, 59, 70

Platon, 107, 189

Pleiades, 172, 184-6

Ploughman, 65, 168, 185

Pole-Star, 70, 189

Polygnotos, 167

Porphyrion, 101

Poseidon, 21, 41-50. 100-5, 108,

112, 119-28, 132, 150, 166, 170,

192

Elates, 128

Erichthonios, 101

Enosichthon, 126

Gaieochos, 122

Poseidon Hipparchos, 101

Hippegetes, 101

Hippios, 101

Hippodromios, 101

Hippomedon, 101

Kynades, 102

Melekh. 104

Tan, 126-8

name-variants, 123, 127

etymon, 127

Poseidonia, 124
Prokyon, 173-4, 187
Prometheus, 72-3, 77
Ptah, 157

Qadmon, 132

Qedem, 83, 132

Qarth-hadasth (Carthage), 47, 101

Ka, 59, 96, 176

Ram, 146-7, 164, 177-84

Eat, the, 58-9

Rephaim, 153

Eesheph-Mikal, 195

Rhadamanthys, 117, 132, 150, 159

Rhea, 118

Ruditdidit, 158

Samas, 133, 139

Samdan, 139

Samlah, 134

Samlath (Semele), 132, 134-6,

140, 156
Samuel, 152
Sarama, 8
Sarameyas, 7
6ara;iyu, 7-8, 42
Sarpedon, 150
Sarvara, 7
Saturn, 139, 142
Saturnus, 139
Schama, 141
Schame-merum, 142
Scheol, 153-4

Scorpion, 173, 177-8, 180-4, 193
Sea-goat, 177-8, 180-4
Sea-monster, 128, 169, 174-5, 188
Seirios, 173, 186-7
Selene, 139
Serapis, 87
Serpent, 41, 101, 157, 169, 171,

175
Shaitan, 26, 89
SikyoD, 150
Snake-holder, 171
Sol, 139

HELLENIC MYTHOLOGY

Soteira, 144, 156
Stymphalos, 195-9
Siirya, 71, 119-20
Swan, 169, 198
Syria, 148

Taineron, 122

Tammiiz, 145-9

Tan, 126-8

Tantalos, 152

Tape (E^. Thebes), 138

Tartak, 199

Tasmit, 136

Taut, 139-40

Tebha (Typbon), 96

Tehoh, 139

Teiresia.s, 152

Teliphassa, 132

Teos, 134

Thaaos, 132, 170

Thebes, 99, 138-42, 148

Thebez, 138

Themistokles, 108, 147

Thetis, 117

Thuro, 132

Tiamat, 175

Tinia, 201

Tiryns, 99

Totemism, 16, 51, 54-62, 68-7 L

78,203.205-15
Tripod, 97, 171, 196
Triptolemos, 15
Troizea, 103-4
Trophonios, 168
Tsidon, 195
Tutu, 191
Tvashtri, 42
Twins, 111, 177-83, 193
Tyr, 19
Tyre, 103

UiNivu (lonians), 86
Uras, 103, 142
Ursa Map, 62. 64-5, 70,
168-9, 188-9

Mln., 62, 64-5, 189

Uru-dug, 172

166,

Uru-salim, 95
Ury, 172

Uscho, 141
Ushas, 7

Venus, 139

Virgin, 171, 177-8, 182-3

Vivasvan, 7, 15

Vivasvat, 42

Vulture, 169, 198

Wain, 169, 188-9
Water-pourer, 177-8, 180-1
Wolf, the, 199-200
Wormingford, 10-11
TVul-mo-sarra, 188

Ya, 153

Yahveh, 87, 153
Yama, 42
Yavishtha, 73
Yawa, 153
Ydi/in (olvos), 135
Yivanas (lonians), 87

Zaepanit, 136
Zenoposeidon, 120
Zetham. 140
Zethos, 140

Zeus, 18-20, 28-30, 65, 89, 9:
104-5, 115, 117-8, 12(»-2

Axieros, 143

Belos, 139, 142

Hypsistos, 140

Xatachthonios, 120

Labrandeus, 161-2

Laphystios, 146-7, 200

Lykaios, 162, 196. 200

Meilichios, 104, 150

Pater, 7, 18

Thalassios, 120

Zodiac, lunar, 67, note

solar, 171, 176-84

Zonnyxos, 132
Zoros, 103
Zu, 74-7

G. NORMAN AND SON, PKINTERS, FLORAL STREET, COVENT GARDEN.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Semitic influence in Hellenic mythology, with special reference to the recent mythological works of the Rt"

See other formats